Timeline for Why is the issuer certificate different at my workplace and at home?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
25 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 3, 2018 at 16:50 | comment | added | Stevoisiak | Related: Is it common practice for companies to MITM HTTPS traffic? | |
| Aug 4, 2017 at 5:18 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Aug 4, 2017 at 8:55 | |||||
| Feb 22, 2017 at 17:58 | comment | added | R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE | @mehaase: Arguably that's a serious bug: unwanted installation of local CA (by malware or a malicious user) will go undetected. It should be doing the opposite; always showing a red broken lock (but allowing the connection) when a local CA that's not restricted to the local DNS domain is used. | |
| Feb 22, 2017 at 15:41 | comment | added | Mark E. Haase | @ydaetskcoR Browser pinning explicitly accepts local CAs, specifically to allow for use cases like corporate TLS intercept, e.g. chromium.org/Home/chromium-security/… | |
| Feb 22, 2017 at 11:31 | history | edited | Anders | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 65 characters in body; edited tags
|
| Feb 22, 2017 at 10:45 | comment | added | ydaetskcoR | I'm not sure this enough to be a separate question but how did the browser not flag this due to certificate pinning? What browser (and version) do you use at work? | |
| Feb 22, 2017 at 10:36 | comment | added | RedGrittyBrick | "If this is true, can I work around this?" - If you don't want your employer to see your personal information and communications, don't put it into equipment they own - that includes both computers and networks. | |
| Feb 22, 2017 at 10:11 | comment | added | xmp125a | @Michael Depends whether interceptor's certificates have been installed on the machine as a part of a company-wide deployment of customized OS installation. In any case I consider such interception a bad practice, unless the company prohibits all strictly work related use of the company's workstations (so the OP is in the breach of the agreement by using Gmail, not the company). If the company allows gmail (personal) use they are now on the hook for the OP's account safety as well (since they removed built-in safety and installed their own). | |
| Feb 22, 2017 at 10:10 | history | edited | ampika | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Gmail is just one example. This is also happening when I visist stackoverflow, facebook, etc.
|
| S Feb 22, 2017 at 10:03 | history | suggested | sleske | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
improve ittle
|
| Feb 22, 2017 at 9:12 | comment | added | sleske | @dave_thompson_085: I don't think this is strictly a duplicate; that questions asks about what has happened, while this asks about workarounds. | |
| Feb 22, 2017 at 9:11 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 22, 2017 at 10:03 | |||||
| Feb 22, 2017 at 8:08 | comment | added | dave_thompson_085 | Dupe security.stackexchange.com/questions/106910/… related security.stackexchange.com/questions/101721/… and security.stackexchange.com/questions/142803/… | |
| Feb 21, 2017 at 19:00 | comment | added | ampika | Probably these certificates have been installed on the machines as trusted, yes. My account has limited access. I need permission for everything expect some basic function, so I can not check this out. | |
| S Feb 21, 2017 at 18:30 | history | suggested | Peter Mortensen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Copy edited (e.g. ref. <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/work_around#Verb>).
|
| Feb 21, 2017 at 18:28 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 21, 2017 at 18:30 | |||||
| Feb 21, 2017 at 17:50 | comment | added | Michael | Not sure I understand how this is not throwing a security error in your browser... is "Root CA" and/or "Operativ CA1" trusted because certificates have been installed on your machine as trusted, or did your company somehow get a different certificate from google for mail? | |
| Feb 21, 2017 at 17:33 | answer | added | Chris Pratt | timeline score: 7 | |
| Feb 21, 2017 at 17:02 | answer | added | Mark E. Haase | timeline score: 10 | |
| Feb 21, 2017 at 13:58 | history | edited | ampika | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Feb 21, 2017 at 13:47 | history | edited | ampika | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 5 characters in body
|
| Feb 21, 2017 at 13:15 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackSecurity/status/834028672260644865 | ||
| Feb 21, 2017 at 10:01 | vote | accept | ampika | ||
| Feb 21, 2017 at 9:14 | answer | added | Steffen Ullrich | timeline score: 50 | |
| Feb 21, 2017 at 9:01 | history | asked | ampika | CC BY-SA 3.0 |