Slashdot Mirror


Government Shutdown: TLS Certificates Not Renewed, Many Websites Are Down (zdnet.com)

More than 80 TLS certificates used by US government websites have expired so far without being renewed, leaving some websites inaccessible to the public. From a report: NASA, the US Department of Justice, and the Court of Appeals are just some of the US government agencies currently impacted, according to Netcraft. The blame falls on the current US federal government shutdown caused by US President Donald Trump's refusal to sign any 2019 government budget bill that doesn't contain funding for a Mexico border wall he promised during his election campaign. This has resulted in hundreds of thousands of government workers being furloughed across all government agencies, including staff handling IT support and cybersecurity. As a result, government websites are dropping like flies, with no one being on hand to renew TLS certificates.

8 of 1,044 comments (clear)

  1. Let's Encrypt by Meneth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they set up Let's Encrypt properly, they can have automatic renewing of their certificates.

  2. Re:It's Pelosi, not Trump by close_wait · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh, you mean that core election promise that Mexico would pay for the wall with a one-off payment. Looks like the Dems (and the GOP before Jan) are just holding him to that promise.

  3. Poor IT practices? by egriebel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know that this being /. that people like to bash Trump at every opportunity (even when unwarranted), but isn't this problem one of crappy cert management? Waiting until the very last minute before renewing a cert isn't a Best Practice. It's not like your wasting money by renewing a cert early.

    --
    ACHTUNG! Das computermachine ist nicht fuer gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen.
  4. Re:This might call for some Fox News counterhackin by ilsaloving · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is no "two sides" to this. This problem falls squarely in the laps of the Republicans.

    Trump had an entire year to get this pushed through when the Reps had all three branches of gov't. He didn't.

    It only suddenly became a burning priority when the democrats took the house. There is only one side being childish right now, and that's been the case for a while now.

    (Yes, the democrats have their issues, but those issues are not what caused this current mess.)

  5. Re:This might call for some Fox News counterhackin by MachineShedFred · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What you just said:
    "No, we aren't in the business of governing anymore."

    The election is over. Now it's time to actually govern, which means working together to get the business of the federal government done.

    If you don't want to govern, don't run for government office. If you just want to be a political hack, get a fucking AM radio talk show like all the other hacks.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  6. context matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Those were not about walls along the whole fucking shebang southern border, but rather small portion, and about sensible policies. You know, like the one republican hate more than dems : fining hugely and financially crushing people hiring illegals. But wait, can't do that, most of those are rich folk voting republican AND donating money. Yet this crack down on the people hiring illegals is what WORK.

  7. Re:It's Pelosi, not Trump by swillden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why did Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell want to prevent him from getting that key campaign promise through?

    Couple things. Paul Ryan delivered on the $5.7 but the Senate didn't have enough votes (10 democrats).

    10 Democrats what? The Republicans had a clear Senate majority, as well as the tie-breaking vote. The bill could have been passed without a single Democrat voting for it, they could even have survived four defections... but they had a lot more than that, didn't they?

    By waiting till after the election (especially after losing the House) McConnell, Trump, and Ryan have made the division in government clear.

    You should re-read your own post. They haven't made the division clear, they're trying to pull a fast one and make it look like it's GOP vs Dems, when really it's Trump vs an alliance of part of the GOP & the Dems. The narrative that "Trump fights his own party" is, in fact, the truth with respect to wall funding (as well as some other areas). Also, "never Trump" is a mischaracterization of Flake and others who supported plenty of Trump's initiatives. Those GOP members aren't "never Trump", they just aren't "always Trump", and in Trump's narrative you're either with him or against him; there's no room for nuanced disagreement.

    FWIW, I'm a Republican-leaning libertarian who rarely agrees with Trump, but believes that even when he's right he's still bad for the country.

    the democrats are not acting based on principle but rather "Never Trump".

    Actually, I think it's both. Even without the Trump hatred I still don't think the Democrats would want to fund this boondoggle of a wall. It goes against their principles, even though they rarely see a government program they don't love. I could be wrong, of course; heaven knows both parties have funded untold boondoggles.

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  8. Re:This might call for some Fox News counterhackin by TrekkieGod · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Which means we should be spending less and taxing more, not spending $5 billion on something that's not even effective at preventing what it's designed to prevent. Considering the majority of illegal immigration is a result of overstayed visas, the majority of the drug traffic happens at legal ports of entry, and the known or suspected terrorists that have attempted to enter the US have been caught at airports, it seems to me the return on investment on building a border wall is nowhere near the $5 billion he's asking for.

    This is slashdot, so in programmer terms, this is premature optimization. Sure, there are thousands of people illegally crossing the border, but if you actually run a profiler you'll see that's not the even the hot path, so why are we proposing to spend so much of resources on that instead of elsewhere?

    --

    Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.