• solrize@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    4 months ago

    Right, main point of my comment is that .internal is harder to use that it immediately sounds. I don’t even know how to install a new CA root into Android Firefox. Maybe there is a way to do it, but it is pretty limited compared to the desktop version.

    • cereals@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      You can’t install a root CA in Firefox for android.

      You have to install the cert in android and set Firefox to use the android truststore.

      You have to go in Firefox settings>about Firefox and tap the Firefox logo for a few times. You then have a hidden menu where you can set Firefox to not use its internal trust store.

      You then have to live with a permanent warning in androids quick setting that your traffic might be captured because of the root ca you installed.

      It does work, but it sucks.

    • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      This is not a new problem, .internal is just a new gimmick but people have been using .lan and whatnot for ages.

      Certificates are a web-specific problem but there’s more to intranets than HTTPS. All devices on my network get a .lan name but not all of them run a web app.

    • Petter1@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      You do not have to install a root CA if you use let’s encrypt, their root certificate is trusted by any system and your requested wildcard Certificate is trusted via chain of trust

      • solrize@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s if you have a regular domain instead of.internal unless I’m mixing something. Topic of thread is .internal as if it were something new. Using a regular domain and public CA has always been possible.

    • lud@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      They didn’t make this too be easy to use. They don’t give a shit about that. That isn’t their job in the slightest.

      They reserved a TLD, that’s all.

      You can use any TLD you want on your internal network and DNS and you have always been able to do that. It would be stupid to use an already existing domain and TLD but you absolutely can. This just changes so that it’s not stupid to use .internal

        • lud@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          But why are people even discussing that?

          This is about an ICANN decision. TLS has nothing to do with that. Also you don’t really need TLS for self hosting. You can if you want though.

          • JackbyDev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            People can talk about whatever they want whenever they want. The discussion naturally went to the challenges of getting non-self-signed certificates for this new TLD. That’s all.