If you’re a developer for an important open source project, they might.
Attacking the xz project wasn’t done because the attacker cared about anything that the xz maintainer had. It was because he was trusted and the software he maintained had been given a fair bit of trust by certain maintainers and could be compromised and used as a vector into other systems that indirectly relied on that open-source project.
plateee@piefed.social
tal@lemmy.today
haroldfinch@feddit.nl 3 days ago
I had no idea “single use certificates” were a thing. It makes sense, although from my personal perspective I have always worked with managed identities and privilege escalation.
I have almost no internet facing services, although the two I have I might swap for the short lived variants. As you said, risk of misuse due to compromise goes down so that makes sense.
For my other services, they are all running on HTTPS, but only available internally over LAN or VPN, all with isolated VLANs sort of like a Hub Spoke model. The two certs that are internet facing are basically for getting access to my VPN. Might swap the internal services to short lived anyway if the automation works well, as I said before, it’s fully automated anyway.