DNSSEC is the weakest link here.
It is too fragile (multiple point of failure). It is high volume (=it need be cacheable).
Puting authentication cert in dns sounds good in theory, but we have never get that reliability
It is too fragile (multiple point of failure). It is high volume (=it need be cacheable).
Puting authentication cert in dns sounds good in theory, but we have never get that reliability
There’s some upcoming attempts at transport security for authoritative DNS servers which might help too: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-hoffman-deleg-se...
Re: DNS security and NTP and Decentralized DNS/PKI with web standards like W3C DID and DID micro-ledgers for record signing:
"Cert Authorities Check for DNSSEC from Today" (2026-03-26) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47401716
If your DNS isn't working, you're not going to be making connections anyway. And if you can't keep DNSSEC running, you can't keep certs up to date either. DNSSEC is actually much simpler, with fewer failure points, once you set it up.
> It is high volume (=it need be cacheable).
It is. Unlike certificates. And the cache lifetimes are much shorter than typical certificate lifetimes.