Information Security Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for information security professionals. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I used openssl to create a X.509 certificate but I don't quite understand the relationship between a X.509 and a SSL certificate. Are they the same? Is a SSL certificate just a X.509 certificate that is used for SSL?

share|improve this question

migrated from Jun 4 '13 at 15:21

This question came from our site for system and network administrators.

up vote 20 down vote accepted

SSL is by far the largest use of X.509 certificates, many people use the terms interchangeably. They're not the same however; a "SSL Certificate" is a X.509 Certificate with Extended Key Usage: Server Authentication (

Other "common" types of X.509 certs are Client Authentication (, Code Signing (, and a handful of others are used for various encryption and authentication schemes.

share|improve this answer

X.509 certificates are a generic, highly flexible format. SSL (now known as "TLS") uses X.509 certificates. A "SSL certificate" is a certificate whose contents make it usable for SSL (usually, usable for a SSL server).

In particular, in most usages of SSL, the client will want to see the intended server name in the certificate. In a Web context (HTTPS), the "intended server name" is the one which appears in the URL; the checks performed by the client are described in RFC 2818 (section 3.1). Also, when a client and server "talk SSL", they agree on cryptographic algorithms to use, some of which implying use of the server's public key, as it appears in the certificate; for instance, if client and server choose a cipher suite which says "RSA key exchange", then the server certificate must contain a RSA public key, and if the certificate contains extensions which limit the authorized ways to use that key (e.g. the Key Usage extension), then these extensions must allow the "encryption" use because that's what is implied by "RSA key exchange" in SSL.

Other features of certificates may prohibit usage for a SSL server, where "prohibit" means "the client will shriek and stammer and display a red scary warning at the user". For instance, a certificate may contain an Extended Key Usage extension which lists the exhaustive list of "roles" for the entity which uses it; if the extension is present, then it should contain "server authentication" or the special "any usage" indicator.

There are a lot of details to care about. Commercial CA summarize the whole thing as "a SSL certificate", really meaning "an X.509 certificate which is all kosher for SSL, all clients will be happy with it".

share|improve this answer
Thanks this is very useful. Quick question. If I understand you correctly, an otherwise valid server certificate is invalid according to the Extended Key Usage if it both contains an Extended Key Usage Extention and does not contain "server authentication" in it's Key Usage Extension. To state it another way, the (otherwise valid) server certificate is valid if it either does not contain an Extended Key Usage Extension, or it does contains one and the extension contains a "server authentication" indicator. Is that correct? – Ej. May 14 '14 at 21:20
Yes, that's the idea. An absent EKU extension is considered equivalent to an EKU which contains the special "any usage" indicator, thereby allowing all usages. – Thomas Pornin May 14 '14 at 21:44
Thanks Thomas! FWIW I think this is the section that covers that point: "If the extension is present, then the certificate MUST only be used for one of the purposes indicated." – Ej. May 14 '14 at 23:18

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.