Before Let's encrypt, around 30% of the web requests done by firefox were encrypted, now it's around 80-90%. The main reason behind this change is of course that Let's encrypt issues certificates for free. But there is an other important related change: not only is the web now encrypted, but certificates are automatically rotated, thanks to the ACME protocol. So it's both openly specified, with an API, and it's free.
And now, on a completely unrelated topic: semi-public/public bug producing machineries:
- Google's OSS-Fuzz and Syzkaller
- Fuzzit, an Israeli startup
- FuzzBuzz, an US startup
- Entities relying on open-source, like fastly
- Entities producing code, like Mozilla or Microsoft
- Universities like TU Darmstadt, the EPFL, … and their students, either as part of their research or curriculum.
- Code forges, like github and their CodeQL magic, or gitlab and others
- Individual and companies, for fame, PR purpose, technical excellence, …, like Checkpoint, Collabora, …
If you've fuzzed at scale, you know that it's usually way easier to find crashes than to get them fixed, and if you're an user, you know that it's easier to get the latest version than to find to what crashes your current installed one is vulnerable.
Wouldn't it be neat to have a standardized protocol to ask various "fuzzing authorities" if a given CPE is prone to (known) crashes, what is the mean time between the discovery of crashing input and a fix, how many crashes were found this month by how many CPU, what is the usual severity/type of crash, … and if the fateful 90-days deadline is passed, being able to get the reproducers?
I know that some people are already crawling bugtrackers and grepping VCS, either to find juicy 1-days, or to shove into some pricey intelligence feed. But as a user, I think it would be fantastic if I could with a simple query have all those information, before deciding to deploy a particular software.