Code signing has become a basic requirement for software teams who want to prove their code is safe, untampered, and actually from them. Whether you’re shipping desktop apps, mobile APKs, or containers, a valid code signing certificate gives users confidence that the code hasn’t been modified somewhere along the way.
Recently, the CA/Browser Forum (the group that sets rules around digital certificates) introduced a big change: starting February 28, 2025, the maximum validity for code signing certificates will shrink to 460 days, just about 15 months. And from June 15, 2025, all reissued certificates will follow the same rule.
This isn’t just a minor policy tweak. If your team is used to working with 2- or 3-year certificates, this means you’ll need to rethink how you manage renewals, key security, and automation. Ignoring it could mean signing failures, build issues, or even unsigned releases.
In the rest of this article, we’ll break down what’s changing, how it affects your signing workflows, and how our CodeSign Secure can help you stay secure and compliant without adding more manual work.
What’s Changing in Code Signing Validity?
Until now, most code signing certificates have had nice, long lifespans of up to 3 years (or 39 months, to be exact). This made things simpler: get your certificate, use it across multiple releases, and renew every few years.
That’s about to change.
The CA/Browser Forum has decided to shorten the max validity of these certificates to just 460 days, a little over 15 months. The goal is to tighten security and reduce the risk of long-lived keys being exposed or misused.
Key Dates to Know
February 28, 2025: CAs will stop issuing code signing certificates with more than 460 days of validity.
June 15, 2025: Any reissued certificates after this point must also follow the 460-day rule, even if the original certificate was valid for 2 or 3 years.
So, if you buy a 3-year certificate before the deadline, you’re fine until you need to reissue it. After June 15, even reissuing that certificate will get you only a 460-day version.
This means more frequent renewals, more tracking, and more room for error unless you’ve got a system in place that keeps things on track.
Why this Change Matters?
At first glance, shortening certificate validity might seem like extra work. But there’s actually some solid reasoning behind it.
Less Time for Keys to Be Misused
The longer a certificate stays valid, the bigger the risk if something goes wrong, like if a private key gets leaked or stolen. Cutting validity down to 460 days helps limit the damage if a key is ever compromised. It’s a “less time, less risk” kind of approach.
Encourages Better Security Habits
Shorter lifespans mean teams have to stay current with how they manage certificates and cryptographic algorithms. It pushes everyone to upgrade keys and settings more regularly, no more “set it and forget it” for years.
Keeps You in Step with Industry Rules
This change isn’t just a suggestion; it’s now part of the official rulebook from the CA/Browser Forum. If you want your code signing certificates to be trusted, you’ve got to play by these new rules. Tools like our CodeSign Secure can help you stay compliant without turning certificate management into a full-time job.
Impact on Organizations and Developers
This new 460-day limit isn’t just a checkbox change; it affects how teams plan, build, and release software.
More Renewals, More Often
With certificates expiring in just over a year, you’ll need to renew more frequently. That means tracking more expiration dates, updating pipelines, and making sure nothing breaks in the middle of a release. If you miss a renewal, your builds may fail, or your signed software might throw warnings.
Key Management Gets Tricky
More renewals also mean more key pairs to handle securely. If you’re not already using HSMs or secure key storage, now’s the time to start thinking about it. Losing track of a private key or storing it in the wrong place can lead to serious issues.
Budgeting and Planning Need a Tweak
If you’ve been buying multi-year certificates and setting them aside for a while, that strategy won’t work anymore. You’ll now be purchasing and managing certificates more often, so it’s worth reviewing how this affects your budget and internal processes.
This is where our platform steps in to help: automated renewals, key storage with HSM integration, and a clean way to manage all your certificates in one place. Less mess, fewer surprises.
Enterprise Code-Signing Solution
Get One solution for all your software code-signing cryptographic needs with our code-signing solution.
Best Practices for Managing Shorter Certificate Lifecycles
With certificates now lasting just over a year, keeping track of everything manually isn’t really practical anymore. To avoid last-minute scrambles and failed builds, it’s time to tighten things up a bit.
Automate Renewals Wherever You Can: If your process for renewing certificates still involves calendar reminders and manual steps, it’s going to get old fast. Automating renewals, especially for repeatable tasks like requesting, reissuing, and installing certificates, saves time and lowers the chances of missing something important.
Store Keys in Secure Hardware: Storing private keys on local machines or shared drives is asking for trouble. Using HSMs (Hardware Security Modules) or cloud-based key vaults gives you the protection you need, especially now that certificates are being refreshed more frequently. It also helps with compliance requirements.
Keep Tabs on Expiry and Reissuance: Set up alerts and dashboards to track when certificates are about to expire. This isn’t just a “nice to have” anymore; missing a renewal window can block releases or trigger trust issues for your users. A little visibility goes a long way.
Our platform is designed to take care of all this. From renewal automation and HSM integration to expiry tracking and secure storage, it helps you keep everything in order with way less manual effort.
How CodeSign Secure Simplifies Code Signing Under the New Rules
With certificates now lasting just 460 days, doing everything by hand is going to feel like a chore pretty quickly. That’s exactly why we built CodeSign Secure to take the stress out of code signing and make the whole process smoother.
Centralized Key & Certificate Management: No more hunting through shared folders, emails, or local machines to find the right key or certificate. Our platform gives you a single place to manage everything, whether it’s for a web app, mobile release, or desktop installer.
CI/CD Integration: Our platform works nicely with the tools you’re already using, like Bamboo, TeamCity, Azure DevOps, Jenkins, and others. Signing becomes part of your build pipeline, not something you have to stop and do separately.
HSM-Backed Signing with PKCS#11 Support: Your private keys never leave the secure hardware. Our platform supports PKCS#11, so it can plug into HSMs and keep your signing keys protected, whether you’re using on-prem HSMs or cloud-based options.
Smart Alerts & Renewal Automation: Our platform keeps an eye on your certificates and gives you a heads-up before anything expires. It also handles renewal steps in the background, so you don’t have to worry about missed deadlines or broken builds.
In short, our CodeSign Secure helps you stay compliant with the new rules, without turning certificate management into a full-time job.
Migration Strategy: From Long-Lived Certificates to 460-day Certificates
If you’ve been using 2 or 3 year certificates, switching to the new 460-day rule might feel like a big adjustment, but it doesn’t have to be. With a bit of planning and the right tools, the shift can be pretty smooth.
Start with a Certificate Audit: First things first: make a list of all your current code signing certificates. Note their issue and expiry dates, where the keys are stored, and which projects depend on them. This gives you a clear picture of what needs attention and when.
Plan for Renewals & Reissuance: If you bought a multi-year certificate before the cut-off, remember: after June 15, 2025, even reissuing that certificate will give you only 460 days. So plan ahead. Build out a renewal calendar, notify your dev/release teams, and avoid any last-minute rush.
CodeSign Secure Makes the Switch Easier
Our platform helps you move to shorter certificate cycles without messing up your workflow. It can scan and track existing certificates, notify you when it’s time to replace them, and handle reissuance through automated flows. Whether you’re transitioning one team or the whole org, our platform keeps the process clean and secure.
Enterprise Code-Signing Solution
Get One solution for all your software code-signing cryptographic needs with our code-signing solution.
Shorter certificate validity might sound like more work, but in reality, it pushes everyone toward better habits, stronger key security, quicker updates, and tighter control over the signing process.
That’s where our CodeSign Secure really shines. It’s built to take care of the heavy lifting, so you don’t have to. Whether it’s tracking certificates, handling renewals, securing private keys in HSMs, or plugging directly into your CI/CD pipelines, our platform keeps your code signing process smooth, secure, and future-ready.
Have you ever wondered if that little padlock icon in your browser truly guarantees a website is secure? Or perhaps, as a website owner, you’ve asked yourself: “How do I know my SSL/TLS certificate is actually valid and doing its job protecting my visitors’ data?” While the familiar padlock and the https:// in the URL are your first visual cues, they’re often just the surface indicators of a much deeper security mechanism. This comprehensive guide will empower you to look beyond these basic signs, teaching you not only how to quickly check an SSL/TLS certificate directly in your browser but also what vital information these digital documents contain and why understanding them is absolutely crucial for your online safety.
Whether you’re a curious everyday internet user, a website owner looking to enhance your site’s security, or a developer seeking practical implementation insights, this guide provides essential information and actionable steps for both Linux and Windows environments.
The Basics of Verification: How to Check SSL/TLS Certificates
To effectively assess a website’s secure connection, you can employ various verification methods, from quick browser checks to in-depth command-line inspections.
Quick Checks in Your Web Browser
Start your assessment directly in your web browser, observing the visual cues and certificate details.
The Padlock Icon: This small symbol in the address bar is
your immediate indicator of a secure connection. A closed padlock signals
encryption, while a broken padlock (or a red line through https://) suggests
a security issue.
Inspecting the URL: Always confirm the presence of https://
in the URL; the ‘s’ denotes a secure, encrypted connection.
Viewing Certificate Details (Step-by-Step): Most browsers
allow you to inspect the certificate in detail.
Google Chrome: Padlock → “Connection is
secure” → “Certificate is valid” →
“Certificate.”
Validity Period: Ensure the certificate has not expired
and is within its active dates.
Using Online SSL/TLS Checkers
For a deeper dive into a website’s security configuration, online SSL/TLS checkers such as DigiCert SSL Certificate Checker offer more comprehensive analysis than browser checks.
Why use them? They probe the server’s setup to identify vulnerabilities or misconfigurations not visible in a browser.
What they reveal: These checkers provide crucial details like the full certificate chain, supported SSL/TLS protocols (e.g., TLS 1.2/1.3), accepted cipher suites, and any known security vulnerabilities.
Command-Line Verification
For detailed diagnostics and troubleshooting, command-line tools such as OpenSSL provide granular control.
to connect to the domain and display extensive certificate details.
Interpreting the output allows you to examine raw certificate data, the chain presented by the server, and negotiated cipher details.
Decoding the Digital Trust: Understanding SSL/TLS & Certificates
Understanding the mechanics behind secure web communication moves beyond basic definitions into the cryptographic and architectural principles that underpin online trust.
What is SSL/TLS and HTTPS?
Secure online communication fundamentally relies on encryption, transforming data into an unreadable format to protect its confidentiality. At the heart of this security are the SSL and TLS protocols. While SSL (Secure Sockets Layer) is commonly used as a generic term, it is critical to note that TLS (Transport Layer Security) is its direct, modern, and more secure successor. All SSL versions are cryptographically broken and deprecated. TLS, in its current iterations (predominantly TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3), incorporates stronger algorithms and improved handshake processes to mitigate vulnerabilities present in its predecessors. HTTPS (Hypertext Transfer Protocol Secure) represents the standard HTTP protocol layered over an SSL/TLS encrypted connection, ensuring all client-server data exchange is authenticated, encrypted, and integrity-protected.
Feature
SSL
TLS
Security
Vulnerable to attacks (e.g., POODLE)
Stronger, more secure, protects against modern threats
Handshake Process
Slower, older algorithms
Faster and more secure; uses hashed handshake messages
Cipher Suites
Supports older ciphers like RC4
Supports AES, ChaCha20, and AEAD ciphers (GCM, Poly1305)
Record Protocol
Uses MAC after encryption (less secure)
Uses HMAC (more secure and standardized)
Alert Messages
Generic and limited
Detailed and specific for better troubleshooting
Forward Secrecy
Not guaranteed
Enforced in TLS 1.3 (via ephemeral key exchange)
Performance
Slower due to inefficiencies
Faster; TLS 1.3 reduces handshake round-trips
Status
Obsolete and insecure
Recommended standard for secure communication
Why is it Crucial?
SSL/TLS and HTTPS are indispensable for online security, upholding three core pillars and offering significant strategic advantages.
Data Confidentiality: Ensures sensitive information (e.g., credentials, payment details) transmitted between client and server remains encrypted and unintelligible to unauthorized interceptors, preventing eavesdropping and data breaches.
Data Integrity: Guarantees that data exchanged has not been tampered with or altered during transit. Cryptographic hashing and digital signatures detect any modification, immediately alerting both parties if data integrity is compromised.
Authentication: Verifies the identity of the server to the client, assuring users they are connecting to the legitimate domain and not a malicious phishing site. This prevents Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) attacks by establishing trust in the server’s identity. Beyond security, HTTPS significantly builds user trust, as visual cues like the padlock reinforce security. Furthermore, Google explicitly uses HTTPS as a Search Engine Optimization (SEO) ranking signal, directly impacting website visibility and organic traffic.
How Does SSL/TLS Work? The SSL/TLS Handshake
The SSL/TLS Handshake is a complex, multi-step cryptographic negotiation that establishes a secure channel before any data transfer.
Client Hello: The browser initiates, sending its supported
TLS protocol versions, preferred cipher suites, and a “client
random” number.
Server Hello: The server responds, selecting the mutually
preferred TLS version and cipher suite, providing its TLS Certificate, and
sending a “server random” number.
Certificate Verification: The browser validates the
server’s certificate by:
Verifying the CA’s digital signature for authenticity.
Building and validating the certificate’s Chain of Trust back to a
trusted root CA.
Confirming its validity period and non-revocation status.
Ensuring the domain name in the certificate matches the accessed URL.
Key Exchange: Using asymmetric cryptography (often
Diffie-Hellman variants like ECDHE), the client and server securely
establish a shared symmetric session key. The client encrypts a
“pre-master secret” (or derives it directly) using the
server’s public key; only the server’s private key can decrypt
or complete the derivation. Both parties then independently compute the same
session key from this secret and the random numbers.
Encrypted Communication: With the session key established,
all subsequent data transfer between client and server is encrypted and
decrypted using this highly efficient symmetric key, ensuring
confidentiality and integrity for the session duration.
Public Key Infrastructure (PKI): The Backbone of Trust
Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) is the architectural framework underpinning digital trust, built upon the asymmetric relationship between cryptographic keys. Each entity possesses a private key (kept secret) and a corresponding public key (freely distributed). The public key encrypts data readable only by the private key, and the private key digitally signs data verifiable by the public key.
Digital Certificates: These electronic documents cryptographically bind an entity’s public key to its verified identity (e.g., domain name, organization). They serve as robust digital identity documents, issued and signed by a trusted third party.
Certificate Authorities (CAs): CAs are globally trusted organizations responsible for issuing, managing, and revoking certificates. They rigorously verify the identity of certificate applicants (e.g., domain control, organizational vetting) before signing and issuing certificates, acting as anchors of trust.
The Chain of Trust: PKI’s hierarchy consists of self-signed Root CAs (pre-installed in browsers/OS), which then sign Intermediate CAs. Intermediate CAs, in turn, sign end-entity (server) certificates. This chain allows browsers to verify the authenticity of any certificate by tracing its signature path back to a trusted root.
Digital Signatures: CAs sign issued certificates using their private keys. When a browser receives a certificate, it uses the CA’s public key (from the chain) to verify this digital signature, ensuring the certificate’s integrity and confirming it was legitimately issued by that trusted CA.
Understanding Cipher Suites and Protocols
The cryptographic strength of an SSL/TLS connection is determined by the specific cipher suite and protocols negotiated.
Cipher Suites: A cipher suite is a collection of
cryptographic algorithms used for a secure connection, typically
specifying:
Key Exchange Algorithm: (e.g., ECDHE, DHE)
Authentication Algorithm: (e.g., ECDSA, RSA)
Encryption Algorithm: For bulk data (e.g., AES-256 GCM,
ChaCha20-Poly1305)
Hashing Algorithm: For integrity (e.g., SHA-256,
SHA-384)
Configuring servers to prioritize robust, modern cipher suites is
critical to prevent the exploitation of weaker cryptographic
methods.
The Importance of Perfect Forward Secrecy (PFS): PFS is a
crucial security property that ensures the compromise of a server’s
long-term private key does not compromise the secrecy of past
session keys and, consequently, previously recorded encrypted
communications. This is achieved through ephemeral key exchange methods
(e.g., ECDHE – Elliptic Curve Diffie-Hellman
Ephemeral), where a unique, temporary session key is generated for
each individual connection. This ephemeral key is never transmitted
or persistently stored and cannot be derived from the server’s
long-term private key. Even if an attacker records encrypted traffic and
later steals the server’s private key, they cannot use it to decrypt
the recorded sessions, providing retrospective data confidentiality and
significantly enhancing overall security.
Acquiring and Managing TLS Certificates: From Generation to Renewal
Obtaining and maintaining TLS certificates for your web properties involves understanding various certificate types and the critical processes of key generation and lifecycle management.
Exploring Various Types of SSL/TLS Certificates
TLS certificates are categorized primarily by their validation intensity and domain coverage, each offering distinct levels of identity assurance and utility.
Domain Validated (DV) Certificates verify only domain control, typically via DNS record or email. These certificates provide essential encryption but no organizational identity proof to users. They are ideal for personal blogs, internal tools, or non-commercial sites, with services like Let’s Encrypt being a popular example.
Organization Validated (OV) Certificates extend beyond DV by verifying the legal existence and identity of the organization applying for the certificate. This offers higher trust by confirming organizational authenticity, which is visible in the certificate details. OV certificates are suitable for business websites, intranets, and e-commerce platforms requiring a layer of verified identity.
Extended Validation (EV) Certificates represent the most stringent validation level, involving comprehensive verification of the applicant’s legal, operational, and physical existence. This provides the highest level of user trust, historically indicated by displaying the organization’s name prominently in the browser address bar (though this visual cue is less common now). EV certificates are essential for large enterprises, financial institutions, and major e-commerce sites where maximum trust signaling is paramount.
Wildcard Certificates are designed to secure a main domain and all its direct subdomains (e.g., *.example.com covers blog.example.com and shop.example.com). Their primary benefit is streamlining certificate management and reducing costs for environments with numerous subdomains. Wildcard certificates, while convenient for securing all subdomains (e.g., *.example.com), pose risks such as a single point of failure—if the private key is compromised, all subdomains are vulnerable—along with challenges in key management, revocation impact, limited auditability, and increased exposure across distributed systems.
Multi-Domain (SAN) Certificates secure multiple distinct domain names or a mix of domains and subdomains that do not fit a single wildcard pattern (e.g., domain1.com, domain2.net, sub.domain3.org). They are ideal for organizations managing diverse web properties under a single certificate.
Self-Signed Certificates are generated and signed by the server itself, rather than by a trusted Certificate Authority (CA). While they provide encryption, they inherently lack third-party verification. Consequently, they trigger severe browser warnings like “Your connection is not private” on public-facing sites due to the absence of a trusted CA signature. Their use is limited to testing, development environments, or secure internal networks where explicit trust can be manually managed.
Generating Your Certificate Signing Request (CSR) and Private Key
Acquiring a certificate from a CA necessitates generating a cryptographic key pair: a private key and a public key. The private key is critically sensitive and must remain secret on your server. The CSR (Certificate Signing Request) is a text-based request containing your public key and identity information, which is submitted to the CA.
Generate CSR: Open an elevated Command Prompt or
PowerShell and run:
certreq -new request.inf your_domain.csr
Output: This command generates the private key
within the Windows certificate store (accessible via certmgr.msc)
and creates your_domain.csr file, ready for submission to your CA.
Implementing SSL/TLS on Your Web Servers: Linux and Windows
With your SSL/TLS certificate acquired and its private key secured, the next critical phase involves correctly installing and configuring it on your web server. This process is highly platform-dependent, requiring specific configurations for Linux-based servers (Apache, Nginx) and Windows Server (IIS). The overarching goal is to securely bind your certificate to your website, enabling and enforcing HTTPS traffic.
Setting Up SSL/TLS on Linux Web Servers
Linux web servers, particularly Apache HTTP Server and Nginx, are widely used and offer robust, command-line driven SSL/TLS configuration capabilities.
Apache HTTP Server:
Prerequisites: Ensure the mod_ssl module is enabled in
your Apache installation. On Debian/Ubuntu, use sudo a2enmod ssl; on
RedHat/CentOS, verify its loading in httpd.conf or equivalent
configuration.
Key Configuration Directives: SSL/TLS settings are
typically defined within a <VirtualHost *:443> block in your
site’s SSL configuration file.
SSLEngine On: Activates the SSL/TLS engine for this Virtual Host.
SSLCertificateFile /path/to/your_domain.crt: Specifies the absolute
path to your primary domain certificate file.
SSLCertificateKeyFile /path/to/your_private.key: Points to the
corresponding private key file. Crucially, this file must have
restrictive permissions (e.g., chmod 400) to prevent unauthorized
access.
SSLCertificateChainFile /path/to/intermediate_chain.crt: (or
SSLCACertificateFile for older versions) Essential for providing the
full chain of trust. This file, often a “CA Bundle,”
contains one or more intermediate certificates issued by your CA,
enabling browsers to validate the certificate back to a trusted
root.
Common File Locations and Server Restart Commands:
Debian/Ubuntu: Certificates in /etc/ssl/certs/, private keys in
/etc/ssl/private/. SSL Virtual Host configurations often reside in
/etc/apache2/sites-available/your_domain_ssl.conf and are enabled
with sudo a2ensite your_domain_ssl.conf.
RedHat/CentOS: Certificates in /etc/pki/tls/certs/, keys in
/etc/pki/tls/private/. SSL configurations might be in
/etc/httpd/conf.d/ssl.conf or site-specific files.
After changes, always test configuration syntax: sudo apachectl
configtest (or apache2ctl). If successful, restart Apache: sudo
systemctl restart apache2 (Debian/Ubuntu) or sudo systemctl restart
httpd (RedHat/CentOS).
Nginx:
Nginx is renowned for its performance and clean configuration. SSL/TLS
directives are typically placed directly within the server block
designated for HTTPS traffic.
Key Configuration Directives within the server block:
listen 443 ssl: Configures Nginx to listen on standard HTTPS port
443 and enable SSL/TLS for this block.
ssl_certificate /path/to/your_domain_bundle.crt: Specifies the path
to your server certificate file. Nginx prefers a single file
containing your domain’s certificate concatenated with the
full intermediate certificate chain (the order is crucial: domain
cert first, then intermediate(s), then root if provided).
ssl_certificate_key /path/to/your_private.key: Points to your
corresponding private key file. Ensure very restrictive permissions
are set for this file.
Testing Configuration and Reloading Nginx:
After modifying Nginx configuration files (e.g., in
/etc/nginx/sites-available/), always test for syntax errors:
sudo
nginx -t
If the test passes, apply changes without dropping active
connections by reloading Nginx:
sudo systemctl reload nginx
For a
full restart (if needed):
sudo systemctl restart nginx
Setting Up SSL/TLS on Windows Server (IIS)
Microsoft’s Internet Information Services (IIS) provides a graphical, wizard-driven environment for managing and implementing SSL/TLS certificates.
Scenario 1 (CSR Created in IIS)
Importing the Issued Certificate into IIS Manager:
Once you receive your signed certificate from the CA, you’ll
import it into IIS.
Open IIS Manager.
Select the server name in the “Connections” pane.
In the central “IIS” section, double-click “Server
Certificates.”
In the “Actions” pane, click “Complete Certificate
Request…”
Browse to your certificate file and provide a friendly name for easy
identification within IIS. This step automatically pairs the received
certificate with the private key that was generated internally by IIS
during the CSR creation.
Binding the Certificate to Your Specific Website within IIS:
After importing the certificate, it must be bound to the website requiring
HTTPS:
Open IIS Manager.
Expand “Sites”, then select your target website.
In the “Actions” pane, click “Bindings…”.
In the Site Bindings dialog:
If no HTTPS binding exists:
Click “Add…”.
Set Type to https.
Choose an IP address (or leave as “All Unassigned”).
Set Port to 443.
Select the imported certificate from the dropdown.
Enable “Require Server Name Indication (SNI)” and the
hostname, if needed. With SNI, multiple websites can run on a
single IP and port, each using its own SSL certificate.
Click “OK”.
If an HTTPS binding already exists:
Select the existing HTTPS binding and click “Edit…”.
Choose the new certificate from the dropdown.
Ensure Port is 443 and update SNI setting if required.
Click “OK”.
Click “Close” to apply.
Your site is now configured to use HTTPS.
Scenario 2 (CSR and Key Created Externally)
If your certificate and private key were generated outside of IIS:
You’ll be prompted to create a password. Remember it — it’s
needed for import.
Importing the .pfx File:
Open IIS Manager and go to Server Certificates as before.
Click Import… in the Actions pane.
Browse to the .pfx file, enter the password, and optionally:
Change the Certificate Store from Personal to Web Hosting (recommended
if using many certs).
Uncheck “Allow this certificate to be exported” if needed.
Click OK. The certificate will appear in the list.
Bind as in Scenario 1:
Repeat the same binding steps from above to enable HTTPS.
Managing Certificate Lifecycles
Effective certificate management is vital to prevent outages and maintain continuous security, especially given their finite validity periods.
Steps to Renew an SSL Certificate
Renewal typically involves generating a new CSR (often with the existing
private key, or a new one for enhanced security).
This new CSR is submitted to the CA for re-validation and issuance of a
new certificate.
The newly issued certificate must then be installed on the web server,
replacing the expired one, followed by a server restart or reload to
apply changes.
Proactive renewal well before expiration is crucial to avoid service
interruptions.
TLS Certificate Automation Benefits
Automating certificate lifecycles greatly reduces operational overhead and
strengthens security. Key benefits of certificate lifecycle automation
include:
Cost Savings: Free CAs like Let’s Encrypt, paired with
automation, can eliminate DV certificate purchase costs and reduce risks
and expenses of outages caused by expired certificates.
Operational Efficiency: Guarantees uninterrupted HTTPS
service through seamless, scheduled renewals.
Enforcing HTTPS: Crucial Redirection Strategies
Even with a certificate installed, users might still try to access your site via HTTP. It is imperative to redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS to prevent “mixed content” warnings, optimize SEO, and ensure all user interactions are secured. This involves configuring permanent (301) redirects on your web server.
Apache:
Using .htaccess files: For simple redirects or per-directory rules
(requires AllowOverride All for AuthConfig in httpd.conf).
RewriteEngine On
RewriteCond %{HTTPS} off
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ https://%{HTTP_HOST}%{REQUEST_URI} [L,R=301]
Using VirtualHost configurations (recommended for performance and cleaner configuration):
Define a separate VirtualHost block for port 80 to handle redirects.
<VirtualHost *:80>
ServerName your_domain.com
ServerAlias www.your_domain.com
Redirect 301 / https://your_domain.com/ # Or use RewriteRule for more flexibility
</VirtualHost>
Apply the changes. This ensures all HTTP requests are permanently redirected to their HTTPS counterparts, providing a seamless and secure user experience.
Advanced Security & Troubleshooting for SSL/TLS
Even with meticulous installation, SSL/TLS configurations can present challenges. This section provides insights into diagnosing common issues and strategies for proactively enhancing your server’s security posture to combat evolving threats.
Troubleshooting Common SSL/TLS Issues
Effective diagnosis of SSL/TLS problems requires understanding common symptoms and employing targeted solutions.
Browser Warnings and Their Solutions
These are often the first, and most alarming, indicators of a problem for
end-users.
“Your connection is not private” / “NET::ERR_CERT_DATE_INVALID” /
“NET::ERR_CERT_COMMON_NAME_INVALID”: These generic warnings often stem
from:
Expired Certificate: The certificate’s validity
dates are past. Solution: Renew and install the new certificate
immediately.
Common Name (CN) Mismatch: The domain in the
certificate doesn’t match the accessed URL (e.g., certificate for
example.com accessed via www.example.com without SANs). Solution: Obtain a certificate covering all
necessary domain variations (e.g., using Subject Alternative Names –
SANs).
Untrusted Certificate Chain: The browser cannot
verify the trust path back to a trusted root CA, usually because
intermediate certificates are missing or incorrectly installed on
the server. Solution: Install the full certificate chain/CA
bundle provided by your Certificate Authority.
Self-Signed Certificate: For public-facing sites,
browsers inherently distrust self-signed certificates. Solution: Obtain a certificate from a globally
trusted CA.
“Mixed Content” Warnings:
Occur when an HTTPS page loads some resources (images, scripts, CSS)
over insecure HTTP. Browsers display a warning because the connection
isn’t entirely secure.
Identify: Use browser developer tools (Console tab)
to pinpoint insecure HTTP URLs.
Update: Change all identified
http:// URLs to https:// in your website’s
code, database, or themes.
Enforce: Implement a Content Security Policy (CSP)
header to automatically block or upgrade mixed content.
Server-Side Errors
These issues prevent the SSL/TLS connection from being established or
cause server failures.
Private Key and Certificate Mismatch: The installed
certificate does not correspond to the private key on the server. Solution: Ensure the correct private key, generated
with the CSR, matches the installed certificate.
Incorrect File Permissions for Certificate Files: On
Linux, overly permissive private key files (e.g., chmod 777) will be
rejected by web servers for security. Solution: Set strict permissions, e.g.,
chmod 400 for private keys.
Firewall Blocks on Port 443: If the server’s firewall
(e.g., ufw, firewalld, Windows Firewall) blocks incoming connections on
HTTPS port 443, no secure traffic can reach the web server. Solution: Open port 443 in your server’s firewall
configuration.
Syntax Errors in Server Configuration: Typos or invalid
directives in Apache, Nginx, or IIS configuration files can prevent the
server from starting or loading SSL/TLS settings. Solution: Always test configuration syntax (apachectl configtest, nginx -t) before restarting services.
Essential Diagnostic Tools
When troubleshooting, these tools are invaluable for rapid problem
identification.
Online SSL Checkers: External tools that perform a
comprehensive scan of your server’s SSL/TLS configuration from the
internet, reporting on certificate chain validity, supported
protocols/cipher suites, and known vulnerabilities, often providing an
overall grade.
openssl s_client (Linux Command-Line): A powerful
utility for connecting to an SSL/TLS server to inspect raw certificate
details, cipher negotiation, and the full certificate chain
presented.
Example:
Browser Developer Tools (Security/Console Tabs): Built
into your web browser, the “Security” tab offers a quick overview of the
certificate and connection details, while the “Console” tab is crucial
for spotting mixed content warnings and client-side errors.
Enhancing Your SSL/TLS Security Posture
Proactively strengthening your SSL/TLS configuration is essential to maintain robust security against evolving threats and ensure compliance with modern best practices.
How to Disable SSL 2.0, SSL 3.0, and TLS 1.0 (and TLS 1.1)
Why Disable? These older protocols contain critical known vulnerabilities (e.g., POODLE for SSL 3.0, BEAST for TLS 1.0/1.1) that can lead to data decryption. Modern best practices mandate disabling them, using only TLS 1.2 or TLS 1.3.
Apache: In your SSL VirtualHost or global configuration
file (typically httpd.conf or ssl.conf), set the following directive to
explicitly disable insecure protocols: SSLProtocol all -SSLv2 -SSLv3
-TLSv1 -TLSv1.1 This enables only TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 (if supported).
Alternative: You can also use SSLProtocol TLSv1.2 TLSv1.3 for
more explicit control.
Nginx: In your server or http block, use ssl_protocols
TLSv1.2 TLSv1.3;.
IIS:
To disable outdated SSL versions on Windows, you can either use a
graphical tool such as IIS Crypto or make the changes manually via the
Windows Registry. To do it manually, follow these steps:
Open the Registry Editor by pressing Win + R, typing regedit, and
pressing Enter.
If the SSL 2.0 folder doesn’t exist, create it by right-clicking
Protocols > New > Key, and name it SSL 2.0.
Inside the SSL 2.0 folder, create a new key named Server.
Within the Server key:
Click Edit > New > DWORD (32-bit) Value.
Name it Enabled, press Enter.
Set its value to 0 (right-click > Modify > enter 0) to disable the
protocol.
Repeat the same process for other protocols.
After making these changes, restart your computer for them to take
effect.
Starting with KB4490481, Windows Server 2019 introduces a feature called
“Disable Legacy TLS” that provides granular control over TLS
versions used with specific certificates. This allows administrators to
enforce a minimum TLS version and cipher suite for designated certificates,
effectively blocking weaker TLS versions. Furthermore, “Disable Legacy
TLS” enables a single online service to offer two types of endpoints
on the same hardware simultaneously: one exclusively for TLS 1.2+ traffic
and another for older TLS 1.0 traffic, catering to diverse client needs
while maintaining security standards.
Note:
Ensure your clients (browsers, applications) support TLS 1.2 or above
before enforcing these changes.
Consider testing configuration changes in a staging environment before
applying them to production.
Some older clients may not support TLS 1.2 by default and might require
updates or configuration changes.
Implementing HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) to Force HTTPS-Only Connections
HSTS is a security policy that instructs browsers to only access your domain
via HTTPS, even if a user attempts to use http:// or clicks an HTTP link.
This prevents protocol downgrade attacks and enhances security.
Implementation: Send the Strict-Transport-Security HTTP
response header.
Alternatively, use the URL Rewrite module to add
the header conditionally for HTTPS requests.
Note:
max-age=31536000 sets the policy duration to 1 year.
includeSubDomains applies the policy to all subdomains.
preload allows your domain to be included in browsers’ HSTS preload
lists (requires submission to Chrome’s HSTS preload list).
Prioritizing Strong Cipher Suites and Ensuring Perfect Forward Secrecy (PFS)
Configure your server to prefer strong, modern cipher suites (e.g., those using AES-256 GCM, ChaCha20-Poly1305) and disable weaker ones.
PFS: Crucially, prioritize cipher suites that implement Perfect Forward Secrecy (e.g., those beginning with ECDHE or DHE). PFS ensures that even if your server’s long-term private key is compromised in the future, past encrypted sessions cannot be decrypted.
Best Practices for Secure Private Key Management
Your private key is the ultimate secret. Its compromise nullifies the entire SSL/TLS security.
Strict Permissions: Set extremely restrictive file permissions (e.g., chmod 400 on Linux) so only the web server process can read it.
Secure Storage: Store keys only on the server, in non-web-accessible directories. Never transmit them via insecure channels (e.g., email).
Password Protection: Encrypt private keys with a strong passphrase for an added layer of protection, even if it requires manual entry on server restart.
How can Encryption Consulting help?
At Encryption Consulting, we help organizations secure and streamline their digital infrastructure through our Certificate Lifecycle Management (CLM) solution, CertSecure Manager. Designed for modern enterprises, CertSecure Manager offers a comprehensive, automated approach to managing digital certificates across diverse environments.
CertSecure Manager provides centralized control over the entire certificate lifecycle—from issuance and deployment to renewal and revocation—across platforms such as Apache, Nginx, and IIS. By automating these processes, it eliminates manual errors, reduces administrative overhead, and prevents service disruptions caused by expired or misconfigured certificates.
The platform includes real-time monitoring and alerting capabilities that notify administrators of expiring, misconfigured, or potentially compromised certificates. It also offers detailed, customizable reporting for compliance audits and certificate inventory tracking. These insights are accessible through an intuitive dashboard that consolidates critical metrics such as CA performance, cryptographic key strength matrices, and certificate expiration trends into a single interface. CertSecure Manager dashboard also features 12 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that offer a clear and concise overview of your certificate environment. These KPIs highlight the current state metrics of the active, expired, pending, and revoked certificates, as well as critical insights into high-risk certificates.
You’ve now completed a comprehensive journey, starting with the immediate observation of a padlock icon and delving deep into the intricate world of SSL/TLS certificates. We’ve explored everything from the fundamental principles of encryption and digital trust to the practicalities of generating, installing, and managing certificates across both Linux and Windows server environments, and even troubleshooting common issues that can arise. Remember, establishing secure communication isn’t a one-time task; it’s an ongoing, continuous process that demands vigilance and proactive management.
As the digital landscape rapidly evolves, with advancements like the widespread adoption of TLS 1.3 and the emerging field of quantum-resistant cryptography, the need for robust security remains paramount. Stay informed, stay proactive, and ensure your digital future is a secure one.
Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) acts as a backbone of secure digital exchange, and this is done by using a combination of public and private cryptographic keys to:
Authenticate the users and the devices.
Encrypt data so that it can be protected from eavesdropping and man-in-the-middle attacks.
Sign documents, software, or emails digitally so that integrity and non-repudiation are ensured.
Establish a secure web channel via HTTPS protocol.
At the core of PKI is the Certificate Authority (CA)—a trusted entity responsible for issuing, validating, and revoking digital certificates. The CA acts as a root of trust by verifying the identity of users, systems, or organizations before issuing certificates. This verification process forms the basis of the trust model that PKI operates on, ensuring that encrypted communications and digital signatures are not only secure but also trustworthy.
For securing websites, encrypting emails, and verifying devices and users in enterprise environments, PKI plays a significant role in an organization. However, if PKI is mismanaged, organizations face many challenges for which solutions are needed.
Let’s take a look at these challenges and the steps taken to overcome them.
Certificate Lifecycle Management
Today, organizations manage thousands to millions of digital certificates across a wide range of applications—including those tied to machine identities such as applications, containers, workloads, and IoT devices. As digital transformation accelerates, managing certificates for non-human identities has become just as critical as for users and devices.
Each certificate has a fixed validity period, typically ranging from a few months to a few years. Failing to renew a certificate before it expires can lead to unexpected outages and serious security risks.
Managing the lifecycle of these certificates—including issuance, renewal, revocation, and retirement—is a complex and time-consuming task, especially when handled manually or through fragmented tools. Without automation and centralized control, machine identities can be overlooked, increasing the risk of expired or misconfigured certificates within modern enterprise environments.
Issues
Downtime of Critical Services: This can lead to the stoppage of business operations, impact user access, and ultimately lead to financial losses.
Compliance Violations: These occur when organizations do not meet some set standards, which can lead to legal penalties, fines, and damage to the reputation of the organization.
Loss of Customer Trust: Due to security outages or data breaches, customers may feel unsafe using the services given by the organization, and this would lead to decreased loyalty and trust.
Pinned Certificate Failures: Even when a new certificate is valid and correctly issued, services that rely on certificate pinning (such as mobile apps or APIs) may reject the replacement unless the pinned certificate is explicitly updated. This can lead to unexpected service failures despite proper renewal efforts.
Solutions
Automated Certificate Lifecycle Management with CertSecure Manager
CertSecure Manager by Encryption Consulting is a comprehensive CLM solution that automates the entire lifecycle of digital certificates. From issuance to renewal and revocation, CertSecure Manager streamlines certificate operations across cloud, on-prem, and hybrid environments—ensuring zero downtime and maximum security.
Key Benefits:
Automates issuance, renewal, and revocation workflows across multiple CAs
Centralized dashboard for visibility and control
Seamless integrations with AD CS, CI/CD pipelines, cloud platforms, and DevOps tools
Enforces policy-based issuance with role-based access control (RBAC)
Intelligent alerting before certificate expiry to avoid last-minute surprises
Real-Time Alerts and Reporting
CertSecure Manager sends automated alerts and notifications for upcoming expirations, misconfigurations, and policy violations. Detailed reports help track certificate usage, ownership, and compliance status across the enterprise.
Auto-Renewal via Integrations
The platform supports integrations with Active Directory Certificate Services (AD CS), major public CAs, and DevOps pipelines (like GitHub Actions, Jenkins, etc.), enabling seamless auto-renewal and policy enforcement, reducing manual intervention and the risk of human error.
Standardized Policies & Access Control
CertSecure Manager enforces standardized certificate templates with defined validity, key algorithms, and SANs. With RBAC and workflow-based approvals, only authorized personnel can manage certificates within their scope.
Lack of Visibility and Inventory
In complex and large IT ecosystems, certificate management is done by different teams across various platforms—cloud services, on-premises systems, IoT devices, and global office locations. In the absence of centralized control, organizations find it hard to maintain a clear picture of:
Where certificates are deployed.
Who manages or owns them?
Whether they are valid, nearing expiration, or not at all used.
This fragmented approach creates blind spots in the PKI infrastructure, which often go unmanaged and unnoticed. The challenge becomes even more pronounced in hybrid environments, where multiple trust stores—such as Java Keystores, Windows Certificate Stores, and browser-specific repositories—exist across systems and applications. These disparate storage mechanisms further complicate certificate tracking, visibility, and policy enforcement.
Issues
Rogue or Forgotten Certificates: Unauthorized certificates issued outside official processes may go unnoticed, leading to unmanaged and potentially vulnerable endpoints that attackers can exploit.
Unexpected Expirations and Failures: Certificates may expire without proper tracking or alerts, causing service outages, application failures, or degraded customer experiences.
Increased Security Risk: Without comprehensive visibility, organizations struggle to evaluate their true security posture, assess exposure, ensure compliance, or respond swiftly to incidents. This lack of insight also increases the risk of compromised endpoints, where expired or misused certificates may go undetected, and TLS misconfigurations, such as weak cipher suites or protocol mismatches, which can expose systems to interception or downgrade attacks.
Solutions
Certificate Discovery Tools:
Use automation to scan across networks, servers, cloud platforms, and containers to detect all certificates, even those that are rogue, expired, or forgotten.
Centralized Certificate Inventory:
A single centralized repository should be maintained to track key certificate details (like owner, expiry, key type, issuing CA, and usage) to enhance visibility and compliance.
Tag and Classify Certificates:
Organise certificates by owner, app, environment, and business unit to ensure accountability and simplify certificate lifecycle operations.
Enterprise PKI Services
Get complete end-to-end consultation support for all your PKI requirements!
The core of PKI is the private key, used for decryption and digital signatures. If compromised, the trust in the associated certificate is lost.
Mismanagement includes practices like hardcoding private keys in source code (e.g., GitHub leaks), using weak algorithms (e.g., small RSA keys), or skipping hardware-backed key generation. Even a single exposed key can lead to security breaches, impersonation, or data leaks.
Issues
Theft of Private Keys: If attackers gain access to a private key, they can impersonate the certificate’s identity, leading to man-in-the-middle attacks, data interception, or unauthorized code signing. High-profile breaches like the SolarWinds attack have shown how poor key security can enable widespread compromise.
Insecure Key Storage: Storing keys in unprotected locations increases the risk of theft, accidental leaks, insider threats, and unauthorized access.
Lack of Key Rotation: Using the same cryptographic key for an extended period gives attackers more time to exploit it, especially if the key has been exposed without detection.
Solutions
Secure Key Storage:
Store private keys securely in HSMs or cloud key vaults, which helps ensure tamper-proof protection and regulatory compliance.
Access Controls & Logging:
Control who can access and use private keys by implementing Role-Based Access Control (RBAC), enabling audit logging, and enforcing Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA). MFA is most effective when combined with detailed logging and Just-In-Time (JIT) access, which grants temporary permissions only when needed, reducing the attack surface and improving accountability.
No Key Transmission:
Private keys should never be sent over networks. Instead, you can use secure protocols like EST, SCEP, or ACME to generate and enroll certificates locally.
Human Error and Manual Processes
Many organizations still rely on manual processing for PKI tasks such as certificate issuance, configuration, deployment, and renewal. This increases the risk of human error, especially in complex, distributed environments. One common issue is configuration drift, where inconsistent settings across environments (like different key lengths or validity periods) emerge over time due to manual changes, leading to security gaps and unpredictable behavior.
Installation of certificates on the wrong servers or applications
Attackers could exploit even small errors in the configuration, such as non-functional services, compliance failures, or vulnerabilities.
Impacts
Non-Functional Certificates
Usage of certificate fields that are incorrect or incomplete causes browsers or applications to reject certificates.
This can lead to TLS failure, disrupted services, or blocked user access.
Security Vulnerabilities
A security posture is weakened when outdated cryptographic settings or long-lived certificates are used.
Failure to maintain compliant certificates could violate standards like PCI-DSS, HIPAA, or NIST, which would lead to severe penalties or audit failures.
Solutions
Use Certificate Templates
To reduce misconfiguration risk, one should use standardized fields like key length, hash algorithm, validity, and SANs.
Integrate into CI/CD Pipelines
Integrate automated certificate issuance during app deployment using tools like Jenkins or GitHub Actions to ensure consistency and policy compliance.
Automate Deployment
Automatically manage certificates across environments using tools like Ansible, Puppet, or Terraform.
Train Teams
IT and DevOps staff should be trained on PKI best practices, secure certificate usage, and automation tools to reduce manual tasks.
Scalability Across Environments
Today’s enterprises operate in complex, fast-evolving environments that span on-premises systems, cloud platforms, containerized infrastructure (e.g., Kubernetes), edge devices, and IoT ecosystems. Each environment requires secure communication and identity verification—often with different certificate requirements. In DevOps pipelines, for example, managing ephemeral certificates for short-lived containers or microservices poses a major challenge, as certificates must be issued, rotated, and revoked rapidly and consistently across dynamic environments.
Traditional PKI systems were designed for static IT environments and struggle to scale with:
High certificate volume
Distributed ownership
Real-time automation
Diverse integration requirements
Issues
Inconsistent Policy Enforcement
Certificates issued by different teams, using varying standards, key lengths, and CAs, result in fragmented PKI policy enforcement. This leads to auditing gaps, compliance failures, and fragmented trust models, making it difficult to maintain a unified security posture across the organization.
Integration Difficulties
Legacy PKI systems often lack native automation or integration with modern platforms, including:
Kubernetes & Containers
Multi-cloud environments
DevSecOps pipelines
IoT frameworks
As a result, enterprises face slower development cycles, increased security risks, and higher operational overhead.
Solutions
Cloud-Native PKI Platforms
Use scalable tools like cert-manager for Kubernetes, as they support auto-scaling, policy automation, and integration with orchestration tools.
API-First PKI
Use PKI systems with REST APIs for seamless DevOps integration, allowing automated issuance, renewal, and lifecycle management.
Short-Lived Certificates
To reduce exposure and eliminate the need for revocation, organizations can issue certificates with short validity periods. This approach is ideal for containers, microservices, and IoT environments, where workloads are dynamic and often ephemeral. Tools and protocols like SPIFFE/SPIRE and cert-manager with ACME enable automated issuance and rotation of short-lived certificates in modern microservice architectures.
How Encryption Consulting Can Help
At Encryption Consulting, we specialize in helping organizations build, manage, and modernize their PKI environments. Whether you’re struggling with certificate lifecycle management, visibility, compliance, or scalability, our end-to-end PKI services have you covered.
What we offer
PKI Assessment&Design: Identify gaps and design a secure, scalable PKI architecture.
Automation & Integration:
Automate certificate issuance, renewal, and deployment across cloud and DevOps environments.
Governance & Compliance:
Create CP/CPS documents and ensure adherence to standards like NIST, PCI-DSS, and ISO 27001.
PKI-as-a-Service:
Offload operations with our fully managed, HSM-backed PKI solution.
Training & Support:
Equip your teams with PKI expertise through hands-on training and continuous support.
Let Encryption Consulting handle the complexity of PKI, so you can focus on what matters most—security, trust, and business continuity.
Conclusion
Public Key Infrastructure is essential for securing digital identities, communications, and services, but managing it effectively is no easy task. From certificate lifecycle challenges to key mismanagement and lack of visibility, organizations face serious risks if PKI is handled manually or with fragmented tools. By adopting automation, enforcing strong policies, and using robust solutions like CertSecure Manager, enterprises can streamline PKI operations, ensure compliance, and maintain digital trust at scale.
Looking ahead, PKI modernization is gaining momentum with emerging trends such as support for quantum-resistant algorithms (PQPKI), delegated attestation, and zero-trust architectures. Investing in proactive and future-ready PKI management today is key to building a secure, scalable, and resilient digital future.
The European Commission has recently published “A Coordinated Implementation Roadmap for the Transition to Post Quantum Cryptography,” outlining a unified strategy to prepare Europe’s digital infrastructure for the challenges posed by quantum computing.
This roadmap sets out clear expectations and timelines for Member States to begin and progress their migration away from vulnerable classical cryptographic algorithms toward quantum-resistant solutions.
Three Milestones Define the Transition Timeline
The document organizes the PQC migration into three key milestones, providing a clear framework for coordinated action across Europe:
By 2026: Complete Initial Steps and Begin Pilots for High and Medium Risk Use Cases
Member States are expected to initiate or update national PQC transition plans, incorporating several foundational activities:
Engaging relevant stakeholders including government CTOs, CISOs, cybersecurity authorities, and research institutions.
Developing detailed inventories of cryptographic assets using standardized formats.
Mapping dependencies across applications, platforms, and supply chains.
Conducting quantum risk assessments to prioritize systems based on vulnerability and impact.
Involving supply chain partners to align product and service roadmaps.
Launching awareness and communication programs tailored to different stakeholder groups.
Sharing knowledge and coordinating via EU cybersecurity groups.
Creating implementation plans with timelines reflecting national priorities.
By this milestone, pilots for high and medium-risk use cases should be underway, enabling practical testing of PQC solutions.
By 2030: Implement Next Steps and Finalize Transition for High-Risk Use Cases
The roadmap anticipates that by 2030, Member States will have completed the PQC migration for all high-risk systems. Key actions include:
Ensuring cryptographic agility in all new products, with upgrade paths supporting post-quantum algorithms.
Allocating adequate resources, both budgetary and human, to sustain the transition.
Updating certification and regulatory frameworks to incorporate PQC standards.
Engaging with private sector stakeholders, training programs, and funding initiatives to strengthen the PQC ecosystem.
Participating in EU-supported testing centers and pilot projects to validate interoperability.
High-risk systems are those protecting data requiring confidentiality for at least 10 years or systems with significant potential impact if compromised.
By 2035: Complete Transition for Medium- and Low-Risk Use Cases
The final milestone aims for the completion of the PQC transition for medium-risk use cases and as many low-risk systems as feasible. This aligns with international goals set by authorities such as NIST and the UK NCSC, which envision retiring vulnerable cryptography by this date.
Understanding Quantum Risk and Prioritization
The roadmap introduces a risk classification framework to guide prioritization:
High risk: Use cases with long-term confidentiality needs and critical impact.
Medium risk: Important use cases with moderate urgency.
Low risk: Systems with less impact or shorter confidentiality requirements.
Organizations are encouraged to integrate quantum risk analysis into existing cybersecurity risk management processes.
PQC Advisory Services
Prepare for the quantum era with our tailored post-quantum cryptography advisory services!
Cryptographic agility: Products and systems should support seamless upgrades to quantum-resistant algorithms.
Stakeholder collaboration: Cross-border and cross-sector cooperation is vital.
Regulatory alignment: Laws, certifications, and procurement must evolve to support PQC adoption.
Awareness and training: Tailored education initiatives should involve all organizational levels.
Resource planning: Budget and personnel must be dedicated to transition efforts.
Testing and validation: Coordinated pilot programs and interoperability testing are essential.
How Encryption Consulting Can Support Your Post Quantum CryptographyJourney
Encryption Consulting offers specialized Post-Quantum Cryptography Advisory Services designed to help organizations assess their quantum risk, develop tailored transition strategies, and implement cryptographic agility aligned with global and EU standards.
Our expert team assists with risk assessments, roadmap development, vendor evaluations, and proof-of-concept testing to facilitate a smooth and compliant migration to quantum-safe cryptography.
At the forefront of the shift to quantum-safe security, Microsoft and Apple are gearing up to embed post-quantum cryptography (PQC) into their next major operating system updates. These developments mark a significant milestone in preparing everyday digital platforms for the quantum computing era.
Apple’s Quantum-Secure Leap at WWDC25
During its Worldwide Developers Conference 2025 (WWDC25), Apple announced that the upcoming releases of iOS 26, iPadOS 26, macOS Tahoe 26, and visionOS 26 will introduce support for negotiating quantum-secure key exchange algorithms with TLS 1.3 servers that also support these advanced protocols. This means apps and services running on Apple’s platforms will begin to communicate using cryptographic methods designed to resist attacks by quantum computers.
Importantly, Apple ensures backward compatibility: if a server does not support quantum-safe algorithms yet, the OS will seamlessly fall back to conventional key exchange methods. This pragmatic approach allows for a smooth transition without disrupting existing connectivity.
Apple first incorporated PQC in iMessage last year, and this expansion to external servers significantly broadens the quantum-resilient footprint. The new operating system versions are expected to launch this fall alongside Apple’s product announcements.
In addition to system-level support, Apple introduced a set of quantum-secure APIs showcased at WWDC25, empowering developers to build PQC-enabled apps. These APIs support:
Post-quantum Hybrid Public Key Encryption (HPKE) using X-Wing
Hybrid signature workflows combining classical and post-quantum algorithms
These cryptographic keys are securely managed via CryptoKit and stored in the Keychain, with optional protection by Apple’s Secure Enclave for enhanced hardware-backed security.
Microsoft’s Quantum-Ready Windows Insider Release
Microsoft has also taken strides by integrating Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) support into the next Windows 11 preview builds available to Windows Insider program participants. This preview includes support for:
ML-KEM, a key encapsulation mechanism based on the CRYSTALS-Kyber algorithm
ML-DSA, a digital signature scheme based on CRYSTALS-Dilithium
Both algorithms are among those standardized by NIST for post-quantum cryptography, representing robust defenses against quantum-enabled attacks.
While a general release date for the PQC-enabled Windows 11 version remains unconfirmed, it is anticipated later this year, signaling Microsoft’s commitment to preparing its OS ecosystem for quantum resilience.
PQC Advisory Services
Prepare for the quantum era with our tailored post-quantum cryptography advisory services!
By integrating PQC into mainstream operating systems, Apple and Microsoft are enabling developers to adopt quantum-safe cryptographic workflows natively. This proactive shift not only strengthens app security against future quantum threats but also encourages industry-wide adoption of next-generation encryption standards.
Developers can leverage the new Apple APIs to experiment with hybrid signatures and post-quantum key exchanges today in beta environments, accelerating readiness for when quantum computers become capable of compromising traditional algorithms.
How Encryption Consulting Can Help
At Encryption Consulting, we recognize the challenges organizations face as quantum computing advances threaten conventional encryption methods. Our Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) Advisory Services provide comprehensive support to help you assess your current cryptographic landscape, develop a tailored quantum readiness strategy, and implement quantum-resistant solutions smoothly and securely.
Our expert team guides you through quantum threat assessments, vendor evaluations, proof-of-concept development, and compliance with emerging standards. We ensure your cryptographic infrastructure is resilient, agile, and ready to protect your critical data and systems against quantum threats.
Code-signing, a process in which developers digitally sign their software to confirm its authenticity and integrity, is a crucial defense against cyber threats like unauthorized code execution, spoofing attacks (where an attacker disguises themselves as a trusted entity to gain access or information), supply chain attacks (which targets less secure third-party vendors to compromise a larger organization’s systems), and many others. By attaching a cryptographic signature, code-signing ensures that software originates from a trusted source and hasn’t been altered.
This integrity is typically verified using hashing algorithms like SHA-256, which generate a unique, fixed-size “digest” of the software. Any change, no matter how small, to the software would result in a completely different hash, immediately revealing tampering. This process thereby fosters user confidence and provides protection against malware.
In 2025, code-signing is evolving quickly, driven by stricter regulations, advanced tools, and the necessity to counter such threats. One such crucial aspect includes timestamping, which provides a verifiable date and time for when the code was signed. This ensures the validity of the signature even if the code-signing certificate itself later expires or is revoked, offering long-term trust and preventing issues with outdated software.
Now, you might be wondering, “Is code-signing really required?”. Well, the answer is yes. Code-signing is vital as it protects users from malicious software and ensures compliance with industry standards. High-profile incidents, like the 2020 SolarWinds attack, where compromised software updates affected thousands of organizations, highlight the risks of unsigned or tampered code. Regulatory bodies, such as the CA/Browser Forum (an organisation primarily focused on setting standards for SSL/TLS and Extended Validation/Organization Validation certificates, but which also provides baseline requirements for publicly trusted code signing certificates), have responded with stricter rules, making code-signing a must-have for organizations aiming to build trust and meet compliance requirements.
Understanding Code Signing
Code-signing is a security process where developers use a digital certificate, issued by a trusted Certificate Authority (CA), to sign their software. This certificate contains a public-private key pair: the private key is used to create a unique digital signature, and the public key allows users to verify it. When a user downloads a signed software, their system checks the signature to confirm the software’s origin and ensure it hasn’t been altered.
This verification of the software ensures:
Authenticity: proving the software comes from a legitimate source, not a malicious actor.
Integrity: confirming the code hasn’t been tampered with since signing.
Trust: reducing the risk of users encountering malware.
Code-signing certificates come in two types, each suited to different needs:
Extended Validation (EV) Certificates: These require rigorous inspection of the organization, offering the highest level of trust. They are ideal for critical software like operating systems or enterprise applications, reducing user warnings and enhancing credibility.
Organization Validation (OV) Certificates: These verify the organization’s identity and are commonly used for software distributed to a broad audience, such as productivity apps or browser extensions.
Code-signing applies to a wide range of software in 2025, including executable files (.exe, .app), scripts (PowerShell, Python, shell scripts), drivers, mobile apps (iOS, Android), browser extensions, firmware for Internet of Things (IoT) devices, container images (crucial for verifying the integrity of microservices and cloud-native applications), and serverless functions (to ensure that only trusted code runs in these ephemeral environments). The digital signature market is projected to grow from $9.94 billion in 2024 to $70.25 billion by 2030, at a CAGR of 38.5%, suggesting a broader trend of increasing reliance on cryptographic solutions.
Key Trends Shaping Code Signing in 2025
According to the Encryption Consulting Global Encryption Trends 2025 Report, 54% of organizations had implemented code-signing by 2024, and 87% of respondents are confident in further adoption this year. This increase is driven by growing cybersecurity concerns, tighter regulations, and user demand for reliable software.
Surge in Adoption
Regulatory bodies like the CA/Browser Forum are enforcing stricter
standards, pushing organizations to adopt secure practices. For instance,
the 2024 AnyDesk attack, where compromised code-signing certificates
prompted urgent replacements, has raised awareness of software integrity
risks. In enterprise software release policies, integrating code signing
directly into Continuous Integration/Continuous Delivery (CI/CD) pipelines
is increasingly mandated to ensure every build and artifact is verified
for authenticity and integrity before deployment. Additionally, recent
changes, such as the CA/Browser Forum’s reduction of code-signing
certificate validity periods from 39 months to 460 days in 2025, aim to
limit vulnerabilities from outdated certificates, driving adoption across
industries like fintech, healthcare, and government.
Enhanced Security Measures
Since June 2023, private keys for code-signing certificates must be stored
on hardware certified to FIPS 140-2 Level 2 or Common Criteria EAL 4+
standards. While Level 2 is the minimum, FIPS 140-2 Level 3 is becoming
more common and recommended for enhanced security. This ensures keys are
protected in Hardware Security Modules (HSMs) or certified USB tokens,
reducing the risk of theft or misuse. In 2025, this practice is standard,
with organizations investing in HSMs or cloud-based key management
services like AWS KMS and Azure Key Vault HSM to increase the efficiency
of and reduce the risk of cyberattacks.
Seamless Integration with DevOps
Integrating code-signing into DevOps pipelines is a major focus,
addressing the 62% of organizations encountering integration issues. Code
signing within CI/CD workflows ensures that all code is signed
consistently, and with the help of tools like our CodeSign Secure, you can
automate signing in platforms like Azure DevOps, Jenkins, or GitHub
Actions, minimizing manual effort and saving time. This also extends to
increasingly critical areas such as satisfying notarization requirements
(e.g., for Apple’s macOS applications to ensure they run without security
warnings), and signing within cloud-native environments for container
images and Helm charts, crucial for validating the integrity of
deployments in Kubernetes and other systems.
Stricter Standards and Policies
Organizations are adopting robust policies to align with industry
standards. Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) limits access to signing keys,
while timestamping prevents issues with certificate expiration. One of the
few common policies and strategies is to use M-of-N approvals, i.e.,
requiring multiple signatories to release high-risk code, further
enhancing security by distributing control and preventing a single point
of failure. Automated key lifecycle management systems handle key
generation, rotation, and revocation, addressing the key management
challenges that around 47% of organisations face. Importantly, key
ceremony logging and comprehensive audit trails are maintained for all
key-related activities and signing events, providing irrefutable evidence
for compliance audits and incident investigations. These policies ensure
compliance and enhance security across the software development
lifecycle.
Focus on Code Integrity in Open Source
With open-source software’s growing popularity, ensuring its integrity is
critical. The 2025 State of Code Security Report by Wiz notes that 35% of
GitHub repositories are public, and 61% contain cloud secrets, increasing
exposure risks. You can mitigate these risks by verifying open-source
components by integrating SBOM with code-signing, which will provide you
with the vulnerability score of your software before signing and releasing
it to the users.
Furthermore, organizations are increasingly leveraging specialized open-source security tools like Sigstore (for transparent, non-repudiable signing), OpenSSF Scorecards (for automated security posture assessment), Trivy, or Grype (for comprehensive vulnerability scanning of container images and filesystems) to assess and validate the security of their open-source dependencies continuously.
Future of Code Signing: Beyond 2025
As code signing evolves beyond 2025, several trends will shape its future, ensuring it remains a vital cybersecurity tool:
Quantum-Safe Cryptography Becomes Standard
With quantum computing advancing, traditional cryptographic methods may
become vulnerable. NIST’s standardized quantum-resistant algorithms, such
as ML-DSA (formerly Dilithium), ML-KEM (formerly Kyber), and LMS, are
critical for code-signing.
Organizations are urged to adopt these to protect against “harvest now,
decrypt later” attacks, where data collected today could be decrypted by
future quantum computers. This threat is particularly acute for long-lived
code, sensitive firmware, or data that needs to remain confidential for
many years or even decades, as attackers can quietly collect encrypted
information now, anticipating that a sufficiently powerful quantum
computer in the future will allow them to decrypt it easily.
AI and Machine Learning Integration
AI is revolutionizing software development, and its integration into code
signing is not far away. It will streamline threat detection by
identifying anomalies in code before signing and enhance workflows by
anticipating signing requirements. This includes leveraging AI for
sophisticated malware analysis, identifying malicious patterns that
traditional methods might miss, and developing “trust scoring” systems
that evaluate the overall security posture and provenance of code before
it ever receives a digital signature. With a projected 83% of developers
utilizing AI tools in 2024, it is crucial to maintain the integrity and
authenticity of code signing.
Blockchain for Immutable Records
Blockchain technology could provide immutable records of software
integrity, enabling transparent verification across supply chains. This is
achieved by chaining cryptographic hashes of code and metadata into an
append-only ledger, often leveraging Merkle trees for efficient and
tamper-evident hash validation of large datasets. The decentralized nature
of blockchain also allows for more resilient and auditable revocation
mechanisms, moving away from centralized points of failure. This is
particularly relevant for open-source and AI-generated code, where trust
is critical.
Pilot efforts like Sigstore’s transparency logs (Rekor), which publicly
record signing events, and initiatives within frameworks like Hyperledger
Indy (focused on decentralized identity and verifiable credentials) are
paving the way for such solutions. By 2027, blockchain-based code-signing
verification may become a standard for complex supply chains.
These trends suggest code-signing will remain dynamic, adapting to technological and regulatory shifts to secure software in an increasingly complex digital world.
Encryption Consulting’s CodeSign Secure
Encryption Consulting’s CodeSign Secure is a cutting-edge code signing solution addressing 2025’s code-signing needs. It provides advanced features aligning with industry trends and requirements, such as:
Looking ahead to 2025, code-signing is becoming a vital part of software security, influenced by trends such as shorter certificate validity, the rise of quantum-safe cryptography, and the integration of DevOps practices. It’s important to note that the adoption of hybrid cryptography, which combines classical and post-quantum algorithms, is a crucial transitional strategy, not a final destination, designed to provide security now while preparing for the quantum future.
Encryption Consulting’s CodeSign Secure v3.02 has been thoughtfully designed to tackle these challenges with its cutting-edge features, helping organizations prepare for both today’s and tomorrow’s threats. It also follows the industry-set best practices, such as regular key audits and automated certificate renewal processes, to maintain cryptographic hygiene and minimize vulnerabilities from expired or compromised keys.
As we move beyond 2025, exciting innovations like AI, blockchain, and quantum-safe algorithms will continue to enhance the effectiveness of code signing. It’s important for organizations to prepare and improve their development processes, empower their teams through training, and stay informed about evolving standards to keep their software secure and compliant.
Code signing certificates are critical for ensuring the authenticity and integrity of software. Still, their theft can enable cybercriminals to distribute malicious code under the guise of legitimacy, provided they also compromise the associated private keys, as the compromise of their associated private keys truly enables malicious signing. These certificates are attractive targets for attackers because they carry the trust of reputable organizations, allowing signed malware to bypass security checks on systems like Windows and macOS.
On January 31, 2023, GitHub, a leading code hosting platform, reported a significant security breach where attackers stole three encrypted code signing certificates. This incident highlighted the vulnerabilities in even the most robust software development ecosystems and the devastating potential of stolen certificates.
With this blog, we will discover the GitHub breach, exploring the challenges they faced, the impact of the theft, and how it could have been prevented.
Company Overview
Microsoft owns GitHub, the world’s largest platform for version control and collaborative software development, hosting over 100 million repositories and serving more than 94 million developers as of 2023. Based in San Francisco, GitHub provides tools for code hosting, version control, and continuous integration/continuous deployment (CI/CD) pipelines, supporting millions of open-source and enterprise projects. These CI/CD and DevOps integrations, while powerful, also present potential attack surfaces that cyber actors can exploit to compromise the software supply chain.
The platform’s critical role in the global software ecosystem makes it a high-value target for attackers seeking to exploit trusted certificates for malicious purposes. GitHub acts as a crucial link in the software trust chain, where its certificates vouch for the legitimacy of the software distributed through its platform. This pivotal position makes it an exceptionally attractive target for attackers, as compromising GitHub’s certificates could allow them to inject malicious code into a vast array of trusted software, effectively undermining the very foundation of software security for millions of users.
Nature and Timeline of the Breach
The breach was facilitated by a compromised Personal Access Token (PAT), which granted the attackers unauthorized access. It is a password-like field associated with a machine account designed for automated tools and scripts to interact with GitHub. The PAT was likely exploited due to inadequate security measures, though the exact method of compromise remains unclear. Attackers had access for about one day before the intrusion was detected. The stolen certificates included:
One Apple Developer ID certificate, valid until 2027.
Two DigiCert-issued certificates, with expiry dates of January 4, 2023, and February 1, 2023, respectively.
Importantly, all stolen certificates were encrypted and password-protected; there was no evidence that the attackers decrypted or used them maliciously. This encryption likely mitigated immediate risks, but the potential for abuse remained a significant concern.
The incident unfolded as follows:
December 6, 2022: Attackers used the compromised PAT to clone repositories, including those containing the code signing certificates.
December 7, 2022: GitHub detected the unauthorized access and immediately revoked the compromised PAT, halting further access.
January 31, 2023: GitHub publicly disclosed the incident via a blog post, revealing the theft and outlining response measures.
February 2, 2023: As a precautionary measure, GitHub revoked the three stolen certificates immediately.
The fact that the attackers got and maintained unauthorized access before detection indicates a potential gap in GitHub’s real-time monitoring and alerting systems for suspicious activities associated with machine accounts and PATs. While GitHub acted swiftly once the access was identified, this period of undetected access underscores the critical importance of strong anomaly detection and continuous security monitoring, especially for a critical infrastructure environment like GitHub.
Challenges
The GitHub code signing certificate brought about several important challenges:
Unauthorized Access to Certificates
On December 6, 2022, attackers gained unauthorized access to select GitHub repositories, stealing three encrypted code signing certificates: one Apple Developer ID certificate and two DigiCert-issued certificates. Although the certificates were password-protected, their theft exposed the risk of attackers attempting to decrypt and misuse them to sign malicious code.
Delayed Detection
The breach went undetected until December 7, 2022, when GitHub identified suspicious activity. This delay allowed attackers to exfiltrate the certificates, highlighting the challenge of real-time monitoring in complex development environments.
Certificate Management Vulnerabilities
The incident revealed weaknesses in certificate storage and access controls. Proper RBAC ensures that accounts, like the one compromised, only have the minimum necessary permissions to perform their designated tasks, preventing broad access to sensitive assets like code signing certificates.
While the certificates were encrypted, they were stored in repositories accessible to the attackers, suggesting insufficient use of secure storage solutions like Hardware Security Modules (HSMs), as they are purpose-built cryptographic devices that store cryptographic keys in a tamper-resistant environment, ensuring the keys never leave the device, even during signing operations. GitHub’s investigation confirmed no malicious use occurred, but the potential for abuse remained a concern.
Revocation and Response Complexity
Revoking the stolen certificates required coordination with Certificate Authorities (CAs) like DigiCert and Apple, a process that was time-consuming and disrupted GitHub’s operations. The Apple Developer ID certificate, valid until 2027, posed a particular challenge, requiring Apple to monitor for misuse of signed executables. Such revocation processes can be very complex and time-consuming; therefore, using automated solutions could significantly streamline the detection of compromised certificates, accelerate the revocation process, and minimize the operational disruption caused by such incidents.
These challenges highlight some bigger issues in the industry, where poor certificate management and insufficient security measures can leave organizations facing considerable risks.
Impact
The theft of GitHub’s code signing certificates had far-reaching implications, even though no malicious use was confirmed:
Potential for Malware Distribution
Had the attackers decrypted the stolen certificates, they could have signed malicious software, bypassing security checks on Windows and macOS systems. According to the IBM Cost of Data Breach report of 2024, the average global cost of a data breach is around USD 4.9 million, reflecting the potential severity of such attacks.
Reputational Damage
GitHub’s reputation as a trusted platform was at risk, as the breach could have eroded confidence among its 94 million users. A research study notes that malware attacks enabled by stolen certificates can significantly harm an organization’s credibility, potentially leading to lost business.
Operational Disruption
GitHub’s response involved revoking the stolen certificates on February 2, 2023, and issuing new ones, which disrupted development workflows.
Regulatory and Compliance Risks
The breach raised concerns about compliance with standards like GDPR and CA/B Forum requirements, as stolen certificates could lead to data breaches if misused.
Industry-Wide Concerns
The incident underscored the growing threat of code signing certificate thefts, with a 742% increase in supply chain attacks reported by a study in recent years. It prompted renewed focus on securing private keys and certificates across the software industry. Beyond the technical implications, such breaches can severely erode developer trust in platforms like GitHub, as they directly impact the confidence that users place in such tools and platforms, which they rely on daily.
Furthermore, the incident had an indirect but significant impact on the vast community of open-source contributors, who depend on GitHub’s integrity as the foundation for their collaborative work and the distribution of their projects.
The breach’s potential to allow widespread malware distribution really emphasizes how crucial it is to have strong certificate protection measures in place. The revocation of the certificates had direct implications for users of affected applications:
GitHub Desktop for Mac: Versions 3.0.2 to 3.1.2 were invalidated, as these were signed with the compromised certificates. Users were advised to update to the latest version, released on January 4, 2023, which included new certificates.
Atom: Versions 1.63.0 and 1.63.1 were also invalidated, and these versions were removed from the releases page. Users were instructed to downgrade to version 1.60.0, noting that Atom had been officially discontinued in December 2022.
Unaffected Applications: GitHub Desktop for Windows was not impacted, as it used different signing mechanisms.
Enterprise Code-Signing Solution
Get One solution for all your software code-signing cryptographic needs with our code-signing solution.
Encryption Consulting’s CodeSign Secure solution offers comprehensive tools to prevent incidents like the GitHub certificate theft. Here’s how it could have mitigated the risks:
Secure Key Storage with HSMs
Instead of relying on potentially vulnerable repository storage, CodeSign Secure leverages FIPS 140-2 Level 3-compliant Hardware Security Modules (HSMs). This is crucial because HSMs provide an isolated, tamper-resistant environment where private keys are generated and used, ensuring they never leave the device.
For GitHub code signing certificate theft, this would have meant that even if attackers gained access to repositories containing encrypted certificates, the corresponding private keys, essential for actual signing, would have remained secure and utterly inaccessible within the HSMs.
Custom Key Storage Provider (KSP)
Encryption Consulting’s proprietary KSP enables client-side hashing, where the cryptographic hash of the code is computed locally without exposing the private key to the user or application. It helps ensure that signing operations occur securely within the HSM, eliminating the risk of private key exposure, even if certificates are stolen.
Automated Signing and Auditing
Manual signing processes are prone to errors and provide less visibility. CodeSign Secure automates the signing process directly within CI/CD pipelines, ensuring only authorized code is signed consistently. More importantly, comprehensive audit trails are generated for every signing operation, which would have enabled GitHub to detect unauthorized access in real-time, potentially stopping the theft before it occurred.
Access Control and Monitoring
CodeSign Secure implements strict, role-based access controls, ensuring that only authorized individuals and automated processes can initiate signing operations. Furthermore, its integration with Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) systems like Splunk enables centralized, real-time monitoring and alerting.
Compliance with Industry Standards
Our CodeSign Secure solution will also help you ensure compliance with CA/B Forum and GDPR requirements and help your organization maintain secure certificate and signing practices.
Conclusion
The 2023 GitHub code signing certificate theft serves as an important reminder of the vulnerabilities in software development ecosystems. The theft of three encrypted certificates exposed significant risks, with potential costs and damages to the organization. GitHub’s response mitigated immediate harm, but the breach underscored the need for stronger certificate security.
Encryption Consulting’s CodeSign Secure, with HSM-based storage, automated signing, and robust monitoring, offers a proactive defense against such threats. As cybercriminals target code signing certificates, organizations must prioritize secure key management to protect their software, users, and reputation, as securing the software supply chain is not solely the responsibility of individual companies but a shared industry imperative, demanding collaborative efforts and best practice adoption to uphold digital trust.
It was a Friday afternoon when the call came in. A large financial services client we had been supporting for over a year was seeing sporadic TLS handshake failures across several of their critical customer portals. No changes had been made to their infrastructure. The certificates were valid, the servers were healthy, and yet thousands of clients were intermittently seeing security warnings. Their teams were scrambling, but the issue wasn’t local. It was external.
So who was the culprit? A regional OCSP (Online Certificate Status Protocol) responder run by their certificate authority was having a DDoS scenario.
This crisis is like a horror we see too many times. And in today’s tightening world of shrinking certificate lifespans, it’s becoming a far too common one.
The World is Changing, So Should Your Certificate Strategy
At Encryption Consulting, we’ve worked with organizations across industries – banks, healthcare networks, energy providers, federal agencies, and one trend keeps surfacing again and again: Certificate lifespans are getting shorter; operational pressure is getting higher.
Since late 2023, with Google’s push to reduce public TLS certificates to 90 days, we’ve helped many enterprises rethink how they approach certificate lifecycle management (CLM). Shorter lifespans reduce the window of compromise if a private key is exposed, but they amplify operational friction.
Renewals become quarterly events, not annual.
Automated issuance pipelines must be bulletproof.
Revocation status checking moves from a back-office hygiene task to a front-line risk factor.
This is where OCSP stapling quietly becomes one of the most underappreciated, yet essential, pieces of modern PKI architecture.
The OCSP Problems Organizations Often Miss
Let’s take a step back and look at the certificate lifecycle overview. Every certificate your organization issues comes with one lingering question every time it’s used: “Is this certificate still valid?”
OCSP was introduced to answer that question in real time. Every time a client initiates a secure connection, it reaches out to the CA’s OCSP server to confirm that the certificate hasn’t been revoked. On paper, this sounds robust.
But in practice, as we’ve seen too many times:
If the CA’s OCSP server is slow or down, your customers experience delays or outright failures.
Every OCSP query reveals client metadata to external servers, raising privacy flags under HIPAA, GDPR, and others.
As certificate renewal frequency increases (thanks to shorter lifespans), OCSP traffic scales exponentially.
For one global e-commerce platform we recently supported, moving to 90-day certificates increased their OCSP query volume by nearly 400% overnight. Without a mitigation strategy, their CDN costs and handshake times would have skyrocketed.
OCSP Stapling Shifts the Control Back Into Your Hands
That’s why we consistently recommend OCSP stapling as a first-line defense.
With stapling:
The server takes charge. It periodically fetches the OCSP response directly from the CA and “staples” it into every TLS handshake.
The client no longer needs to query the CA directly. Everything it needs to verify revocation status is already presented during the handshake.
Privacy improves. No more revealing browsing behavior to third-party OCSP responders.
Performance improves. No more waiting for external OCSP servers to respond.
It sounds simple and technically, it is. But operationalizing this across diverse infrastructure is where most organizations stumble. That’s where our real work begins.
A Healthcare Client’s Reality Check
One of the most illuminating examples came from our work with a healthcare client last year. As part of HIPAA audits, regulators flagged an unexpected risk: patients accessing their portal from personal devices inadvertently revealed session metadata to external OCSP servers.
The audit findings were clear: Even seemingly harmless OCSP queries counted as unnecessary third-party exposure of protected health information (PHI).
Working with their security, compliance, and infrastructure teams, we designed a phased rollout of OCSP stapling across their entire web-facing infrastructure. The result:
OCSP traffic dropped by 96%.
TLS handshakes became more resilient.
Audit flags were cleared.
Privacy exposure risks were closed.
What started as a minor audit finding quickly became a flagship internal security improvement story. And frankly, these stories are becoming more common with every quarter.
Latest 2025 Compliance Orders You Need to Be Aware Of
We’re not operating in a vacuum. Here’s the reality facing CISOs and IT leaders today:
PCI DSS 4.0 mandates tighter revocation and certificate management controls.
HIPAA audits are increasingly scrutinizing even indirect data exposures like external OCSP callouts.
The EU’s NIS2 directive and financial sector-focused DORA 2025 introduce harsher penalties for operational disruptions, making dependency on fragile OCSP infrastructures a regulatory liability.
Google’s 90-day certificate policy shift, already influencing industry behavior, is just the tip of the iceberg. Shorter lifespans are becoming de facto across private PKI as well.
In this environment, OCSP stapling isn’t an “optimization.” It’s a risk management control.
How Encryption Consulting Takes Your Security Way Beyond Just Stapling
When we engage with organizations on certificate management, OCSP stapling is rarely a standalone project. It fits into a larger modernization journey that typically includes:
Hardening revocation infrastructure against DDoS and service disruption risks
Integrating real-time CLM monitoring into security operations dashboards
Aligning architecture with both Zero Trust models and compliance audit expectations
What’s most rewarding for us, as trusted experts in applied cryptography, is transforming our clients’ certificate management from a fragile, reactive burden into a resilient, automated trust infrastructure that silently powers their security, compliance, and business continuity, no matter how complex the environment becomes.
Certificate Management
Prevent certificate outages, streamline IT operations, and achieve agility with our certificate management solution.
Certificate management is fundamentally about trust. And trust breaks down fastest when revocation checking becomes a point of failure.
OCSP stapling doesn’t just make things faster. It gives you back control over performance, privacy, compliance, and operational uptime.
As of June 2025, where certificates live for 90 days but revocation status needs to be validated in real time, control is your greatest asset.
If your organization isn’t yet stapling certificates, or even worse, doesn’t know who’s responsible for revocation operations, you may be one OCSP outage away from your next incident.
At Encryption Consulting, we don’t just advise on your security improvements. We help you build, automate, and harden your certificate ecosystem, end-to-end. We’ve helped dozens of organizations avoid that call. If this security challenge resonates with you, let’s talk.
You don’t have to look too far to see that software supply chains are getting attacked. In just the past year, attacks on open-source repositories shot up by over 150% (according to Entrust’s April 2025 report), with malicious packages slipping into places like npm and PyPI, quietly waiting for developers to pull them into their code.
At the same time, the build systems that the pipeline companies rely on to turn code into deployable software have become easy pickings for attackers. Weak access controls, unprotected credentials, and unverified build artifacts have made CI/CD platforms a high-reward target.
But it’s not just the tools. Third-party vendors and open-source dependencies are often outside the security team’s direct control, making them a blind spot. And with the average enterprise relying on 600+ SaaS apps and thousands of libraries, keeping tabs on every moving part isn’t just tricky, it’s nearly impossible.
The end result? A perfect storm of risk, where a single unsigned binary or compromised update can lead to full-blown breaches, reputational damage, or compliance failures. The pressure on developers, security teams, and leadership to protect the entire software supply chain has never been higher.
Why Traditional Defences Aren’t Enough Anymore?
Firewalls, antivirus, and even vulnerability scanners have their place, but they weren’t built to deal with the mess that modern software development has become.
Take SBOMs (Software Bills of Materials), for example. On paper, they sound like a great idea: list every component, track every dependency. In practice? Security teams are now flooded with thousands of entries across hundreds of apps, most of which are updated weekly, if not daily. When a new vulnerability drops (think Log4j or XZ Utils), try to figure out if you’re affected and where you can feel like hunting for a needle in a haystack.
Then there are unverified packages. Developers move fast, pulling in open-source libraries by the dozen. But how many of those packages are actually vetted? How often do they check signatures? If you’re not enforcing policy at the point of pull or build, chances are, malicious code can slip in without much resistance.
And let’s not forget the build systems themselves. CI/CD tools are often the unsupervised workhorses of software delivery, pushing updates, signing binaries (sometimes), and packaging releases. But if no one’s watching who has access, which keys are being used, or what’s actually being built, that’s a big problem. Compromising a build pipeline can be just as effective (and far quieter) than breaching a production server.
All of this adds up to a tough situation for CISOs. They need real-time assurance that the code being signed, shipped, or deployed is safe. But with so many gaps from dependency chains to dev tooling, there’s rarely a clear answer. Traditional defences weren’t designed for this level of complexity. And that’s where purpose-built solutions like our CodeSign Secure come in.
Build Systems are the New Breach Frontier
There was a time when attackers focused mainly on stealing credentials or hitting production servers. Now? They’re going straight for your build systems, the place where your software actually gets made.
Why? Because it’s a shortcut. If someone gets access to your CI/CD pipeline, they don’t need to go after every developer or try to poison source code upstream. They just wait until everything is packaged neatly for release, slip in some malware or backdoor, and let you deliver it to customers.
What makes it worse is how much trust is placed in these systems, with surprisingly little oversight. Many orgs still rely on shared secrets or plain-text tokens in build scripts. Signing keys might live on local dev machines or inside unsecured containers. And in some cases, there’s no signing at all, which means it’s anyone’s guess whether a binary is authentic or tampered with.
That’s a big reason attacks like SolarWinds and 3CX hit so hard. Once the attackers got into the build process, they didn’t need to do anything flashy. They just sat quietly in the pipeline and let the automation do the rest.
This is where code signing becomes non-negotiable. It’s not just a formality; it’s a digital receipt that proves your software came from the right source, hasn’t been changed, and can be trusted. But here’s the catch: signing only works if it’s actually integrated into your build and release process, done securely, and managed with control.
And that’s the whole point of tools like our CodeSign Secure to bring structure, automation, and accountability to what’s often the wild west of modern build systems.
Why Code Signing is Non-Negotiable?
Let’s be real, if you don’t trust your own code, why should anyone else?
When software moves through development, testing, and release, there are a lot of hands involved: developers, automation tools, plugins, scripts, open-source libraries, maybe even a few external contractors. Somewhere along that chain, something can go wrong. Code gets tampered with. A build system gets popped. A malicious dependency sneaks in.
That’s exactly what happened in high-profile breaches like SolarWinds, where attackers slipped malware into a signed update. Or the GitHub certificate theft, where attackers made off with valid signing certs to distribute malware that looked completely legit. These weren’t flashy zero-days; they were about trust being broken at the source.
Code signing is how you fix that. When done right, it’s like sealing your software with a tamper-proof stamp. It proves three things:
Who created it (authenticity)
That it hasn’t been changed since signing (integrity)
That it’s safe to run (trustworthiness)
It also gives you a digital trail so when something goes sideways, you can track it back to the exact build, signer, and time.
But here’s the thing: signing isn’t a checkbox. It only works if:
You’re using secure key storage (not dumping keys in build scripts)
Signatures are enforced and verified
You have visibility and control over who signs what, when, and where
This is where our platform, CodeSign Secure, comes in. It makes code signing part of the pipeline, not an afterthought. It handles keys securely, tracks every signature, and gives you control over signing policies without slowing things down.
In the end, trust doesn’t start at deployment; it starts at the first line of code.
How CodeSign Secure Protects Your Software Supply Chain
This is where our CodeSign Secure steps in. It’s built to give you confidence in what you’re building, signing, and shipping without slowing your team down.
At its core, our platform helps you lock down your code signing process so that only the right code gets signed, and only by the right people or systems. No random devs pushing releases from personal machines. No exposed keys sitting in GitHub Actions. No guessing who signed what.
Here’s how it helps:
Secure Signing with HSM or Cloud HSM: Your private signing keys stay safe either in a FIPS-certified HSM or a trusted Cloud KMS provider. Our platform makes sure those keys never leave the vault. No more plain-text keys in the build log.
CI/CD Integration: Our platform plugs right into your existing CI/CD pipelines, whether you’re using Jenkins, GitHub Actions, GitLab, Azure DevOps, Bamboo, or something custom. It automates the signing process right after build, so there are no extra steps, no bottlenecks, and no chance someone forgets to sign.
SBOM Correlation Built in: Our platform doesn’t just sign binaries, it also ties in SBOM data. That way, every signed artifact can be traced back to the components inside it. When a new CVE hits, you’re not scrambling to figure out if you’re affected; you already know.
Enforceable Signing Policies: Want to make sure only release managers can sign production code? Or can test builds not be signed with production keys? Our platform supports fine-grained policy enforcement, so you’re always in control. You can set approvals, enforce role-based access, and even block builds that don’t meet the rules.
Future-Ready with Post-Quantum Algorithms: Worried about quantum threats? Our platform has your back. It supports post-quantum-safe algorithms like ML-KEM, ML-DSA, and LMS, so your signatures stay valid well into the future, even after quantum computing gets real.
Whether you’re securing internal builds, public releases, or open-source projects, our platform gives you the tools to sign with confidence, track with precision, and respond fast when things go wrong.
Enterprise Code-Signing Solution
Get One solution for all your software code-signing cryptographic needs with our code-signing solution.
It’s not just about good security anymore; it’s about proving it.
Governments and regulators are tightening the screws. In the U.S., Executive Order 14028 kicked off a chain of requirements around software supply chain security. In Europe, you’ve got DORA and NIS2 raising the bar on third-party risk. And don’t forget PCI DSS 4.0, which now expects stronger controls around software integrity and digital signatures.
These aren’t just suggestions, they’re deadlines with real consequences. If your software isn’t signed properly, or if you can’t prove where it came from, you’re suddenly out of compliance and possibly out of business.
And it’s not just the auditors. Customers are asking harder questions, too. They want to know if your software is tamper-proof, if your keys are secure, and how fast you can respond to new threats. “We use HTTPS” or “We have antivirus” doesn’t cut it anymore.
This is where our platform fits in perfectly. It helps you:
Enforce signing across your SDLC
Secure keys in HSMs or Cloud KMS
Track and prove software origin
Map signed artifacts to SBOMs
Generate audit-friendly logs and reports
So, when the compliance team comes knocking or a customer wants proof you’re not scrambling. You’ve got the answers ready.
Conclusion
You can patch every server, train every employee, and lock down every endpoint, but if your software supply chain isn’t locked tight, attackers will find a way in.
Our platform, CodeSign Secure, helps you fix that. It puts you back in control of what gets signed, who signs it, and how it’s tracked without slowing down your builds or piling extra work on your team.
Whether you’re a fast-moving startup or a large enterprise juggling multiple teams and pipelines, our platform gives you the tools to:
Sign everything that matters
Keep signing keys out of reach
Prove code authenticity, instantly
Respond fast when things go wrong
If you’re serious about protecting your software from build to release and showing your customers and auditors that you mean business, it’s time to see our CodeSign Secure in action.
When organizations need to secure digital communications, verify identities, or enable secure access to network resources, they often turn to Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) technology. At the core of PKI is the Certificate Authority (CA), a trusted entity responsible for issuing, managing, and validating digital certificates. These certificates are electronic credentials that bind a public key to the identity of a user, computer, or device, enabling secure, encrypted communication, authentication, and digital signatures.
This article aims to help IT professionals diagnose and resolve CA communication issues, ensuring that digital certificates can be reliably issued, validated, and used for secure operations.
Microsoft implements this technology called Active Directory Certificate Services (AD CS). AD CS is a Windows Server role that allows organizations to create and manage their own internal CA. AD CS supports issuing a wide range of certificate types, including:
User certificates: These are used for user authentication, secure email (S/MIME), and digital signatures.
Machine (computer) certificates: Enable computer and server authentication, encryption, and secure communications.
Web server certificates: Secure web servers and applications using SSL/TLS encryption.
Code signing certificates: These are used for signing software and scripts to ensure their integrity and authenticity.
VPN and remote access certificates: Secure remote connections via VPNs and other remote access technologies.
Network device certificates: Authenticate devices like routers, switches, and firewalls that may not have domain accounts.
Smart card certificates: Enable strong authentication for users through smart cards or hardware tokens.
The certificates provided by AD CS help ensure:
Confidentiality: Only intended recipients can read data by encrypting it.
Integrity: Digitally sign data to prevent tampering.
Authentication: By confirming the identity of users, computers, or devices accessing network resources.
Microsoft implements this technology through Active Directory Certificate Services (AD CS), a Windows Server role that enables organizations to create and manage their own internal Certificate Authority (CA).
A Microsoft CA can be set up in several ways, including as a root CA (the trust anchor for your organization) or as a subordinate CA (which issues certificates under the authority of the root CA). Enterprise CAs integrate with the Active Directory, which allows automated certificate issuance and management, while standalone CAs operate independently and require manual approval of certificate requests.
Ensuring reliable communication with your Microsoft Certificate Authority (CA) is important for any organization that relies on the Active Directory Certificate Services (AD CS) for secure certificate issuance, authentication, or integration with third-party platforms. Suppose you are experiencing issues with certificate requests, renewals, or integration failures. In that case, this step-by-step guide will help you systematically verify and resolve Microsoft CA communication problems. First, let us look at the differences between Public CA and MSCA.
Enterprise PKI Services
Get complete end-to-end consultation support for all your PKI requirements!
To help understand the scope of Microsoft CA, here’s a brief comparison with public CAs:
Feature Date
Microsoft CA (AD CS)
Public CA (e.g., DigiCert, Let’s Encrypt)
Deployment
On-premises, managed internally
Cloud-based, provider-managed
Trust Scope
Internal users, systems, and services
Public trust across browsers, devices
Validation Model
AD-based automation
Domain (DV), Org (OV), or Extended (EV) Validation
Cost Model
Infrastructure and maintenance costs
Per-cert or subscription fee
Best for
Internal apps, servers, devices, VPN, S/MIME
Websites, external apps, APIs
Support & SLAs
Internal IT or Microsoft support
Vendor-provided SLAs, support
Step-by-step guide
1. Confirm the Microsoft CA Service Is Running
We will start by ensuring the CA service is active on the server. Before troubleshooting any certificate-related issues, always start by confirming that the Certificate Authority (CA) service is running on the server. This is critical because if the CA service is stopped, no certificate requests can be processed, and any downstream troubleshooting will be ineffective and waste valuable time. Open a PowerShell window and run:
Get-Service certsvc
The output should indicate the service status as “Running.” Alternatively, you can open the Services management console (services.msc) and check that “Active Directory Certificate Services” is running.
If the service is stopped, a quick restart can often resolve the issue. Use the following PowerShell command to start or restart the service:
Restart-Service certsvc
After restarting the service, always check the Windows Event Viewer for service-related errors or warnings. Open the Event Viewer by searching for eventvwr.msc. Navigate to Applications and Services Logs > Microsoft > Windows > CertificationAuthority.
Review recent events for errors, warnings, or informational messages related to the CA service. Pay special attention to logs with Event IDs such as 58 (certificate chain issues), 4886 (certificate requests), and other relevant entries, as these can provide insight into underlying problems or confirm successful operations.
TCP 135 – RPC Endpoint Mapper It is used for initial client/server negotiation for RPC communication.
TCP 445 – SMB (used for certificate templates and Group Policy) It is required for accessing certificate templates (stored in AD), GPO distribution, and DCOM.
Dynamic RPC Ports – TCP 49152–65535 (for Windows Server 2012 and newer) It is used after RPC Endpoint Mapper assigns a high port for communication.
TCP 88 – Kerberos (for domain authentication) It handles domain authentication when a user or computer requests certificates.
Why These Ports Matter?
Kerberos (TCP 88): Required for domain-joined machines to authenticate to the CA, especially during auto-enrollment or certificate template access.
SMB (TCP 445): Access to certificate templates and CA policies stored in Active Directory relies on SMB.
RPC/High Ports (TCP 135 + 49152–65535): Core for DCOM and RPC calls used by certreq, certutil, MMC snap-ins, and when requesting certificates remotely.
Verify the CA is reachable and responsive, and if it fails, it indicates that your system is unable to communicate properly with the Certificate Authority (CA). This failure can imply several underlying issues mentioned below:
Steps:
Open Command Prompt or PowerShell on a client machine and run the following command. It is also recommended that the certutil command be tried from both the client and the CA server itself.
certutil -config – -ping
You’ll be prompted to select the CA. A successful response confirms the CA is reachable.
Prompts you to select the CA from a list. A successful response confirms the CA is reachable.
Scripted/Automated Check:
certutil -config “<CAName>\<CACommonName>” -ping
Replace <CAName>\<CACommonName> with the full configuration string of your CA (e.g., CA-SERVER\My-Enterprise-CA). This runs the check directly against the specified CA, making it suitable for scripts and automation.
Common Issues:
“RPC Server Unavailable” errors indicate communication breakdowns. One such example of such an error is:
If you receive such an error, the CA may be unreachable by the system, misconfigured, or blocked by security policies.
DNS resolution failure – The CA’s hostname cannot be resolved
Firewall restrictions – Required ports (e.g., TCP 135 for RPC) are blocked
CA service is offline – The CA server is down, or the Certificate Services service is stopped
Network segmentation – Routing or VLAN isolation prevents communication
Such issues prevent clients from discovering or enrolling with the CA.
4. Verify Service Account Permissions
The account used to communicate with the CA must have specific permissions on the CA and certificate templates.
To check CA-level permissions
Open the Certification Authority console on the CA server (certsrv.msc)
Right-click the CA and select Properties
Navigate to the Security tab
Confirm that the service account has permission to Request Certificates.
For more detailed auditing or scripting, you can use tools like dsacls:
These tools help verify if the service account has been granted necessary rights via AD delegation, especially in larger or automated environments.
To check template-level permissions:
Open the Certificate Templates snap-in (certtmpl.msc)
Right-click the relevant certificate template and select Properties
In the Security tab, confirm the account has Read, Enroll, and, if needed, Autoenroll permissions
These permissions must be granted through Active Directory and may require a Group Policy refresh to apply. To verify that the correct Group Policies have applied, run the following on the client system:
gpresult /r
This command displays the applied Group Policy settings and can help confirm whether autoenrollment or certificate-related policies are active on the machine.
Tip: If a certificate template is published but not visible or usable by a service account, it’s usually a template-level permission issue. If no templates work at all, start by checking CA-level permissions.
Typical Roles That Interact with the CA:
NDES Service Account Used by Network Device Enrollment Service for device certificate requests.
Needs “Request Certificates” at the CA and Read/Enroll on templates.
Autoenroll Clients Domain computers/users auto-enrolling for certificates.
Require “Request Certificates” at the CA and Read, Enroll, (Autoenroll if used) on templates.
Application/Integration Accounts Used by apps/services (e.g., SCEP) for certificate automation.
Need “Request Certificates” at the CA and Read/Enroll on templates.
Administrators Require full control.
Manage CA and templates.
5. Ensure Certificate Templates Are Published and Visible
If your expected certificate template is not available, it may not be published, or your account may lack visibility. Open the Certificate Authority(certsrv.msc).
Right-click “Certificate Templates” and select “New” > “Certificate Template to Issue.”
Select and publish the required template.
From a domain-joined client, you can list all available templates with the following command:
certutil -template
If your template does not appear, check permissions and publishing status on CA. It’s important to note that replication delays in Active Directory can affect the visibility of new or updated templates across different domains or sites. The changes that are made on the CA or in template permissions may take some time to propagate and become visible to all clients
To list all templates currently issued (published) by the CA using PowerShell:
Get-CATemplate
This requires the CertificateServices module, which must be run on the CA or a machine with RSAT (Remote Server Administration Tools) installed.
6. Review Event Logs for CA-Related Errors
On the CA server, open Event Viewer and navigate to the following location:
Applications and Services Logs > Microsoft > Windows > CertificateServicesClient
Review both Operational and Debug logs for errors such as “Access Denied,” “RPC Unavailable,” “Template Not Found,” or “Enrollment Failure.” These logs often point directly to permission issues, connectivity failures, or misconfigurations.
For complete insight, check event logs on both the CA server and client machines. Client-side logs can reveal policy application issues, enrollment errors, or connectivity problems that may not appear in the CA’s logs. Also, if you want a more advanced troubleshooting is required, consider enabling verbose/debug logging for the Certificate Services (certsvc) component by adding the following registry value:
After applying the change, restart the Certificate Services to activate detailed logging using powershell:
Restart-Service -Name CertSvc
7. Validate Certificate Chain and CRL Accessibility
A common cause of communication issues is an incomplete or untrusted certificate chain. Ensure:
The CA’s root and intermediate certificates are in the appropriate “Trusted Root Certification Authorities” and “Intermediate Certification Authorities” stores.
Certificate Revocation List (CRL) endpoints are accessible from client devices and integration servers.
You can check certificate stores using:
certlm.msc
And verify CRL accessibility with:
certutil -verify -urlfetch <certificate_file.cer>
Replace <certificate_file.cer> with the path to your certificate file. Additionally, to directly confirm that CRL distribution points (CDPs) are reachable, open the CRL URL in a web browser or use a tool like curl:
curl -I http://<crl_url>
A successful HTTP 200 response indicates the CRL is accessible. This step helps rule out firewall or DNS issues affecting CRL reachability, which can lead to certificate trust or revocation errors during validation.
To analyze the contents of a downloaded CRL, use OpenSSL command:
openssl crl -in <crl_file.crl> -noout -text
This command displays CRL metadata, revocation entries, and the issuer’s information. It helps verify that the CRL is correctly issued and up to date.
Technical Impact of CRL or AIA Failures:
Failures to access CRL or AIA URLs can disrupt certificate validation, leading to a variety of operational issues. These typically arise from DNS resolution problems, firewall blocks, HTTP proxy misconfigurations, or missing publication settings on the CA. Below are key technical manifestations of such failures:
Certificate Chain Validation Errors
Certificate validation may fail during chain building, triggering errors such as CERT_E_REVOCATION_FAILURE, CERT_E_CHAINING, or CERT_E_UNTRUSTEDROOT. These indicate issues in reaching revocation or AIA endpoints.
SCEP and Autoenrollment Failures
Enrollment operations may fail with specific error codes, such as:
0x80092013: Revocation server offline
0x80094800: Invalid certificate authority
These errors reflect the inability to fetch revocation status or authority information.
TLS/SSL Handshake Failures
Clients may reject server certificates during TLS/SSL negotiations due to incomplete chains or unavailable CRL/AIA URLs. This can interrupt secure communications for services like HTTPS, LDAPS, or VPNs.
Event Log Indicators
Windows Event Viewer logs may capture relevant entries under CertificateServicesClient or Schannel, indicating revocation check timeouts, chain construction errors, or download failures from CDP/AIA URLs.
OCSP and CRL Retrieval Failures
Attempts to fetch revocation data via OCSP or CRL may fail due to:
DNS resolution issues
Incorrect or unreachable URLs
HTTP proxy restrictions
Missing or misconfigured CA publications
These issues can silently break trust validation processes unless actively monitored.
Quick Troubleshooting Checklist
Step
Command/Location
Expected Result
Troubleshooting Tips
CA Service Status
Get-Service certsvc
Service is Running
If not running, check Windows Event Logs for errors. Try restarting the service. Ensure dependencies are met.
If it fails, verify firewall settings, network connectivity, and that RPC (port 135) is open between the client and the CA.
CA Ping
certutil -config – -ping
“Ping completed successfully.”
If unsuccessful, check network connectivity, CA service status, and DNS resolution of the CA server.
Template Visibility
certutil -template
The template is listed
If missing, ensure the template is published on the CA and AD replication is complete. Check template permissions.
Permissions
certsrv.msc > Security
Required permissions are granted
If permissions are missing, review and assign necessary rights to users/groups. Check for group policy conflicts.
Event Logs
Event Viewer (group by “Network”, “Service”, “Permissions”, “Templates”)
No RPC or permission errors
If errors are present, review details for clues. Filter logs for relevant errors. Address issues as per error codes.
How can Encryption Consulting help?
Encryption Consulting helps organizations secure and manage Microsoft Certificate Services by providing clear guidance on fixing communication problems, setting up PKI correctly, and automating certificate processes with CertSecure Manager. We work with clients to find the exact cause of issues such as service settings, access permissions, or network errors.
CertSecure Manager supports this by sending alerts before certificates expire, renewing them automatically to avoid downtime, and connecting with Active Directory to follow company policies for certificate use. It keeps track of all certificates in one place, watches for any changes, and handles tasks without needing constant manual work, offering a more automated certificate management.
It ensures the CA is properly integrated with enterprise systems. Whether dealing with a one-time outage or planning a full PKI deployment, we provide the support needed to maintain a reliable, compliant, scalable certificate infrastructure.
Enterprise PKI Services
Get complete end-to-end consultation support for all your PKI requirements!
Following these steps, you can systematically diagnose and resolve most Microsoft CA communication issues. This approach ensures that your PKI infrastructure remains robust, secure, and integrated with your organization’s certificate management workflows. Proactive monitoring and auditing of CA health and certificates usage help prevent disruptions, detect anomalies early, and support compliance efforts. If you continue to face challenges, consider contacting PKI experts for advanced troubleshooting and support.