Kazumara

I mean, if someone tries to “man in the middle”, or maskerade as my website, the trusted stuff will not add any security.

As long as they can obtain a certificate signed by a trusted signer for your name, you are correct. And you are touching on a real issue here. The number of trusted signers in the browser stores is large, and if only one can be tricked or compromised, then the MitM can generate a certificate your browser would trust just as well as your own original one.

If someone hacks my site [...]

then it's over anyway, yes. The signature on the certificate only validates your TLS key as being one that was properly assigned to the holder of your domain name. Once the endpoint is compromised, TLS doesn't matter anymore.

if the browsers weren’t locked down

Actually maybe they aren't as locked down as you think. To my knowledge you can add your own signing key certificates to your local installation of Firefox, Chrome and the Windows cert storage. In fact there are companies who do this a lot. They Man-in-the-Middle all their employees, with a proxy that does security scanning. For this reason they will deploy their signing keys internally. So the browsers still work. You can use these mechanisms for yourself if you like.

Example documentation: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/setting-certificate-authorities-firefox

A certificate fundamentally only does the following, it binds a name and a public key together and attaches a signature to that binding.

Anyone can make a certificate binding any key to any name and put their own signature on it, they just can't fake others people's signatures. This is also what you do if you self sign a certificate. If you then install the public key of your signing key in your webbrowser you can connect to your own services using your TLS key and your browser will check that the server presents the certificate with a matchign signature proving that it is using the right TLS key.

You can also bind your TLS key to www.wikipedia.org and sign it. However nobody else knows your signing key, and thus nobody would trust the certificate you signed. Which is a good thing, because otherwise it would be easy for you to impersonate Wikipedia's website.

The value of trusted certificates lies in the established trust between the signers (CAs) and the software developers who make browsers etc. The signers will only sign certificates to bind names and TLS keys for the people who actually own the name, and not for third parties.

The validation of ownership is the thing that varies a lot. The simple way is just checking for control of the web server currently reachable under a name, or checking for control of the DNS entries for a name, but the more complicated validations check business records etc.

So when you're asking do they protect better, it's kind of difficult to say.

• If you can validate the signature yourself, say you have control of the browser and the server, then your own signature is fine, and a trusted one wouldn't be any better.
• But if you want third parties, that don't know you, to be able to verify that their TLS session is established to a person who actually owns the domain, rather than a man in the middle, then the only practical solution today is using that established trust system.
• If you are asking about the encryption strength of the TLS session itself, then that's completely independent of the certificate issue, because again the certificate only binds a name to a key with a signature. You can bind an old short key, whose private key has been leaked before to a name, or you can bind a modern long key that is freshly generated to the same name. You can used either key in a good or a bad cryptographic setup. You can use deprecated SSL 3.0 or modern TLS 1.3. Those choices don't depend on who signs the certificate.

I hope that helps, sorry for writing so much

Sure, just convince the creators and maintainers of important software certificate stores to add your trust root. For example: Google, Mozilla, Microsoft, Apple, Linux, Cisco, Oracle, Java, Visa.

Well it stands to reason, that TLS, i.e. Transport-Layer-Security, would secure the transport, and not secure the server providing the service against intrusion.

Also how is your hypothetical related to cost of certificates? If you use an expensive certificate with in person validation of your organization and its ownership of the domain name (these types of certs exist), then how does that change the case where your site is hacked, compared to the free certificate?

Yeah he's borderline, I wasn't sure if it was a good idea to include him.

He's silent, but he has always had a face and was emoting with it a bit even in 1993.

Now in the latest two titles he's still silent, and you don't see his face as often, but on the other hand he has started emoting with actions. For example breaking the screen Samual Hayden is using to try and convince him that it was worth the risk to experiment with the hell powers that flooded in.

There is also tons of lore describing his motivations and previous actions. In the end for me that tips the scale towards him being a preexisting character that you play as. But I can also see that one can ignore that and self insert pretty easily.

I knew "pter" ment wing, like in helico-pter, but thanks for teaching me "chiro" meaning hand. Now the chiro-practic makes sense too, it's just the guy that does stuff to you with his hands.

No no, of course they all do. Fedora just comes with SELinux out of the box, probably still a consequence of it once being downstream of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, before IBM came.

Tack för denna manual

Not of our own volition, but we were luckily forced under threat of sanctions by the USA and EU to accept the OECD standard Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement (MCAA). So now there is some form of automatic information flow to other countries tax authorities. But I don't understand the workings in detail.

Here's an article from that time (2016) that gives a good overview, but you'll have to use machine translation, as the english version of the article is way shorter and less informative: https://www.swissinfo.ch/ger/politik/automatischer-informationsaustausch-in-steuerfragen_die-schweiz-begraebt-das-bankgeheimnis-auch-fuer-eu-buerger/42194104

Oh I didn't know that thanks.

Found it:

Kalemba explains that, following the events of The Witcher 3, Ciri has undertaken the famously painful Trial of the Grasses which has mutated her into a powerful and resilient warrior.

HLI, ich hatte keine Ahnung dass man Fliegenpilze mit der richtigen Zubereitung essen kann!

200 g Rhabarberblätter (nur die Blätter, Stängel sind essbar)

Das ist geil, explizit nur die nicht essbaren Teile bitte