Oh this is wonderful news:
-
Oh this is wonderful news:
DNS-PERSIST-01: A New Model for DNS-based Challenge Validation
https://letsencrypt.org/2026/02/18/dns-persist-01.html> Instead of publishing a new challenge record for each issuance, you publish a standing authorization in the form of a TXT record that identifies both the CA and the specific ACME account you authorize to issue for this domain.
-
Oh this is wonderful news:
DNS-PERSIST-01: A New Model for DNS-based Challenge Validation
https://letsencrypt.org/2026/02/18/dns-persist-01.html> Instead of publishing a new challenge record for each issuance, you publish a standing authorization in the form of a TXT record that identifies both the CA and the specific ACME account you authorize to issue for this domain.
@rysiek ooooh!
-
R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
-
Oh this is wonderful news:
DNS-PERSIST-01: A New Model for DNS-based Challenge Validation
https://letsencrypt.org/2026/02/18/dns-persist-01.html> Instead of publishing a new challenge record for each issuance, you publish a standing authorization in the form of a TXT record that identifies both the CA and the specific ACME account you authorize to issue for this domain.
@rysiek YES!
-
E em0nm4stodon@infosec.exchange shared this topic
-
Oh this is wonderful news:
DNS-PERSIST-01: A New Model for DNS-based Challenge Validation
https://letsencrypt.org/2026/02/18/dns-persist-01.html> Instead of publishing a new challenge record for each issuance, you publish a standing authorization in the form of a TXT record that identifies both the CA and the specific ACME account you authorize to issue for this domain.
@rysiek More DNS to break ... Hoo Rah!
-
Oh this is wonderful news:
DNS-PERSIST-01: A New Model for DNS-based Challenge Validation
https://letsencrypt.org/2026/02/18/dns-persist-01.html> Instead of publishing a new challenge record for each issuance, you publish a standing authorization in the form of a TXT record that identifies both the CA and the specific ACME account you authorize to issue for this domain.
@Michał "rysiek" Woźniak ·
As a complete diy-ing amateur in this field i sympathize with any approach that makes it easier.
-
Oh this is wonderful news:
DNS-PERSIST-01: A New Model for DNS-based Challenge Validation
https://letsencrypt.org/2026/02/18/dns-persist-01.html> Instead of publishing a new challenge record for each issuance, you publish a standing authorization in the form of a TXT record that identifies both the CA and the specific ACME account you authorize to issue for this domain.
@rysiek soon we are back in the late 90s where you got a cert for anything if you could prove that you're willing to pay for it...
-
Oh this is wonderful news:
DNS-PERSIST-01: A New Model for DNS-based Challenge Validation
https://letsencrypt.org/2026/02/18/dns-persist-01.html> Instead of publishing a new challenge record for each issuance, you publish a standing authorization in the form of a TXT record that identifies both the CA and the specific ACME account you authorize to issue for this domain.
@rysiek Does this mean easier access to certs without an api to create cert records? Sweet!
-
@rysiek soon we are back in the late 90s where you got a cert for anything if you could prove that you're willing to pay for it...
@florian I don't see how that's the case
-
@rysiek Does this mean easier access to certs without an api to create cert records? Sweet!
@Epic_Null easier access to *wildcard* certs, yes.
-
R relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
