惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

S
Security @ Cisco Blogs
Scott Helme
Scott Helme
Threat Intelligence Blog | Flashpoint
Threat Intelligence Blog | Flashpoint
T
Threat Research - Cisco Blogs
AWS News Blog
AWS News Blog
Spread Privacy
Spread Privacy
D
Darknet – Hacking Tools, Hacker News & Cyber Security
Security Latest
Security Latest
Simon Willison's Weblog
Simon Willison's Weblog
C
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency CISA
G
GRAHAM CLULEY
cs.CL updates on arXiv.org
cs.CL updates on arXiv.org
I
Intezer
S
Securelist
Google DeepMind News
Google DeepMind News
S
Schneier on Security
T
Troy Hunt's Blog
Help Net Security
Help Net Security
Microsoft Azure Blog
Microsoft Azure Blog
V
V2EX
Security Archives - TechRepublic
Security Archives - TechRepublic
O
OpenAI News
博客园 - Franky
G
Google Developers Blog
Stack Overflow Blog
Stack Overflow Blog
TaoSecurity Blog
TaoSecurity Blog
MyScale Blog
MyScale Blog
P
Privacy International News Feed
K
KPMG report finds enterprise disconnect between AI and its ROI | CIO
Google Online Security Blog
Google Online Security Blog
Latest news
Latest news
Vercel News
Vercel News
T
The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss
博客园_首页
S
Security Affairs
PCI Perspectives
PCI Perspectives
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
C
Cisco Blogs
Recent Announcements
Recent Announcements
L
LangChain Blog
GbyAI
GbyAI
F
Fortinet All Blogs
N
News and Events Feed by Topic
T
Tor Project blog
IT之家
IT之家
P
Palo Alto Networks Blog
D
DataBreaches.Net
小众软件
小众软件
宝玉的分享
宝玉的分享
F
Full Disclosure

Let's Encrypt

The difficulty of making sure your website is broken Simplifying Certificate Renewals for Millions of Domains with ACME Renewal Information (ARI) Six-Day and IP Address Certificates Available in Certbot Shorter Certificate Lifetimes and Rate Limits DNS-PERSIST-01: A New Model for DNS-based Challenge Validation On the Importance of "Hello" and "Thanks" 6-day and IP Address Certificates are Generally Available 10 Years of Let's Encrypt Certificates Decreasing Certificate Lifetimes to 45 Days New "Generation Y" Hierarchy of Root and Intermediate Certificates Ten Years of Community Support ACME Renewal Information (ARI) Published as RFC 9773 Native ACME Support Comes to NGINX OCSP Service Has Reached End of Life We've Issued Our First IP Address Certificate Expiration Notification Service Has Ended Reflections on a Year of Sunlight How We Reduced the Impact of Zombie Clients Sustaining a More Secure Internet: The Power of Recurring Donations Ending TLS Client Authentication Certificate Support in 2026 How Pebble Supports ACME Client Developers Ten Years of Let's Encrypt: Announcing support from Jeff Atwood We Issued Our First Six Day Cert Encryption for Everybody Scaling Our Rate Limits to Prepare for a Billion Active Certificates Ending Support for Expiration Notification Emails Announcing Six Day and IP Address Certificate Options in 2025 Announcing Certificate Profile Selection Ending OCSP Support in 2025 Intent to End OCSP Service More Memory Safety for Let’s Encrypt: Deploying ntpd-rs Let’s Encrypt Continues Partnership with Princeton to Bolster Internet Security Takeaways from Tailscale’s Adoption of ARI An Engineer’s Guide to Integrating ARI into Existing ACME Clients Deploying Let's Encrypt's New Issuance Chains New Intermediate Certificates Introducing Sunlight, a CT implementation built for scalability, ease of operation, and reduced cost A Year-End Letter from our Vice President Our role in supporting the nonprofit ecosystem Increase your security governance with CAA Shortening the Let's Encrypt Chain of Trust ISRG’s 10th Anniversary Improving Resiliency and Reliability for Let’s Encrypt with ARI Thank you to our 2023 renewing sponsors A Look into the Engineering Culture at ISRG Let’s Encrypt improves how we manage OCSP responses A New Life for Certificate Revocation Lists Nurturing Continued Growth of Our Oak CT Log TLS Beyond the Web: How MongoDB Uses Let’s Encrypt for Database-to-Application Security Let’s Encrypt Receives the Levchin Prize for Real-World Cryptography New Major Funding from the Ford Foundation TLS Simply and Automatically for Europe’s Largest Cloud Customers Making the Web safer and more secure for everyone Resources for Certificate Chaining Help Speed at scale: Let’s Encrypt serving Shopify’s 4.5 million domains Preparing to Issue 200 Million Certificates in 24 Hours The Next Gen Database Servers Powering Let's Encrypt A Year-End Letter from the Executive Director of Let's Encrypt and ISRG Extending Android Device Compatibility for Let's Encrypt Certificates Standing on Our Own Two Feet [Updated] Let's Encrypt's New Root and Intermediate Certificates Let's Encrypt Has Issued a Billion Certificates Multi-Perspective Validation Improves Domain Validation Security How Let's Encrypt Runs CT Logs Onboarding Your Customers with Let's Encrypt and ACME Introducing Oak, a Free and Open Certificate Transparency Log Transitioning to ISRG's Root The ACME Protocol is an IETF Standard Facebook Expands Support for Let’s Encrypt Looking Forward to 2019 Let's Encrypt Root Trusted By All Major Root Programs Engineering deep dive: Encoding of SCTs in certificates Looking Forward to 2018 ACME Support in Apache HTTP Server Project Wildcard Certificates Coming January 2018 Milestone: 100 Million Certificates Issued ACME v2 API Endpoint Coming January 2018 OVH Renews Platinum Sponsorship of Let's Encrypt Let’s Encrypt 2016 In Review Launching Our Crowdfunding Campaign Our First Grant: The Ford Foundation Squarespace OCSP Stapling Implementation Introducing Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) Support ISRG Legal Transparency Report, January 2016 - June 2016 What It Costs to Run Let's Encrypt Let's Encrypt Root to be Trusted by Mozilla Full Support for IPv6 Defending Our Brand [Updated] Progress Towards 100% HTTPS, June 2016 Leaving Beta, New Sponsors ISRG Legal Transparency Report, July 2015 - December 2015 New Name, New Home for the Let's Encrypt Client Software Our Millionth Certificate OVH Sponsors Let's Encrypt Entering Public Beta Facebook Sponsors Let's Encrypt Public Beta: December 3, 2015 Why ninety-day lifetimes for certificates? The CA's Role in Fighting Phishing and Malware Let's Encrypt is Trusted
End of Life Plan for RFC 6962 Certificate Transparency Logs
2025-08-14 · via Let's Encrypt

Update, August 18, 2025

We have updated the read-only and shutdown dates to ensure that our new Static CT API logs are fully trusted by browsers before switching Oak to read-only in order to avoid any disruption.

Let’s Encrypt operates two types of Certificate Transparency (“CT”) logs—some implement the original RFC 6962 API, and some that implement the newer Static CT API. Today we are announcing that on November 30, 2025, we will make our RFC 6962 logs read-only. Past that date, we will write only to our Static CT logs. On February 28, 2026, we will entirely shut down our RFC 6962 logs.

End users (consumers or relying parties) of Web PKI certificates do not need to take any action. The work that needs to be done to make this transition will be handled by Let’s Encrypt and the browsers.

RFC 6962 is from June of 2013 and describes the original version of CT. It was a revolutionary upgrade for transparency in the Web PKI, ultimately allowing anyone to monitor issuance from all certificate authorities. Over time, though, growth in certificate issuance volume has revealed that the original CT design doesn’t scale well enough. Let’s Encrypt currently issues more publicly trusted certificates in a single day than existed in total during 2013.

What are the issues with RFC 6962 logs?

Cost

The first issue with RFC 6962 logs is the high cost of running them, particularly at Web scale, which has significantly limited the number of entities willing to operate them. Annual cloud costs for our logs are approaching seven figures.

The biggest contributor to this is that the data is stored in a relational database. We’ve scaled that up by splitting each year’s worth of data into a “shard” with its own database, and then later shrinking the shards to cover six months instead of a full year.

The approach of splitting into more and more databases is not something we want to continue doing forever, as the operational burden and costs increase. The current storage size of a CT log shard is between 7 and 10 terabytes. That’s big enough to be concerning for a single database: we previously had a test log fail when we ran into a 16 TiB limit in MySQL.

Scaling read capacity up requires large database instances with fast disks and lots of RAM, which are not cheap. We’ve had numerous instances of CT logs becoming overloaded by clients attempting to read all the data in the log, overloading the database in the process. When rate limits are imposed to prevent overloading, clients are forced to slowly crawl the API, diminishing CT’s efficiency as a fast mechanism for detecting mis-issued certificates. Ideally, clients should be able to obtain copies of the whole log in a relatively short time, but the traditional API has made that impractical.

Availability

The second issue with RFC 6962 logs is the potential for problems and non-compliance when the period called a Maximum Merge Delay (“MMD”) is exceeded.

One of the goals of CT was to have limited latency for submission to the logs. The Merge Delay design feature was added to guarantee that property. When receiving a new certificate submission, a CT log can return a Signed Certificate Timestamp (SCT) immediately, with a promise to include it in the log within the log’s MMD, conventionally 24 hours. While this seems like a good tradeoff to avoid the alternative of slowing down certificate issuance, there have been multiple incidents in which important logs have exceeded their maximum merge delay, breaking that promise.

If the log does not integrate the certificate within the MMD window, the log is out of compliance and can be distrusted. If a log is distrusted, it’s disruptive for the operators and those who depend on it, and there are fewer logs for the ecosystem to rely on.

How does the new type of log resolve these issues?

In 2023 Filippo Valsorda suggested a new API for CT logs that avoids both of these issues—the Static CT API. The Static CT API for submitting certificates to logs is the same as RFC 6962, but the API for retrieving certificate information is quite different and the MMD is eliminated. The result is logs that are much more cost effective to operate and have better availability. We previously discussed our experiences testing out the new design in “Reflections on a Year of Sunlight.”

Serving Tiles

Certificate Transparency logs are a binary tree, with every node containing a hash of its two children. The “leaf” level contains the actual entries of the log: the certificates, appended to the right side of the tree. The top of the tree is digitally signed. This forms a cryptographically verifiable structure called a Merkle Tree, which can be used to check if a certificate is in the tree, and that the tree is append-only.

Static CT tiles are files containing 256 elements each, either hashes at a certain tree “height” or certificates (or pre-certificates) at the leaf level. Russ Cox has a great explanation of how tiles work on his blog, or you can read the relevant section of the Static CT specification.

Unlike the dynamic endpoints in the RFC 6962 API, serving a tree as tiles doesn’t require any dynamic computation or request processing, so we can eliminate the need for API servers. Because the tiles are static, they’re efficiently cached, in contrast with CT APIs like get-proof-by-hash, which have a different response for every certificate, so there’s no shared cache. The leaf tiles can also be stored compressed, saving even more storage!

The idea of exposing the log as a series of static tiles is motivated by our desire to scale out the read path horizontally and relatively inexpensively. We can directly expose tiles in cloud object storage like S3, use a caching CDN, or use a webserver and a filesystem.

Object or file storage is readily available, can scale up easily, and costs significantly less than databases from cloud providers. It seemed like the obvious path forward. In fact, we already have an S3-backed cache in front of our existing CT logs, which means we are currently storing our data twice.

No More Merge Delay

Static CT takes a different approach to adding certificates to the log while maintaining the same external submission API as RFC 6962. Static CT logs hold submissions while it batches and integrates certificates in the log, eliminating the merge delay. While this leads to a small latency increase, we think it’s worthwhile to avoid one of the more common CT log failure cases.

It also lets us embed the final leaf index in an extension of our SCTs, bringing CT a step closer to direct client verification of Merkle tree proofs. The extension also makes it possible for clients to fetch the proof of log inclusion from the new static tile-based APIs, without requiring server-side lookup tables or databases.

Going Forward

Let’s Encrypt has submitted new Static CT API logs for inclusion in certificate transparency programs. We expect these logs to be included and trusted prior to the read-only date for our RFC 6962 logs, and we will begin submitting our certificates to them as soon as possible.

We may stop submitting our own certificates to our RFC 6962 logs prior to the read-only date, but other CAs will be able to write certificates to our RFC 6962 logs until the read-only date.

Conclusion

The Static CT API has proven to be operationally better and more scalable than the RFC 6962 design in almost every way. With the substantial increase in certificate volume over time, we need that improved efficiency to make running CT logs cost-effective. As a result, we’re switching fully to the new log architecture in order to make the best use of our resources. The Static CT API logs we operate will provide exactly the same security and transparency benefits as our old RFC 6962 log did.

As we explained above, this requires no changes at all for end users. It may require configuration changes on the part of certificate authorities that have been submitting certs to our old log (they can start submitting to one or both of our new logs instead). It also requires software updates for ecosystem participants who monitor logs; they’ll need to ensure that they have client software that’s compatible with the new API. Overall, this change should help ensure that our CT logging continues to be able to grow with the Web PKI.