Not sure that was the point, as Rudy clearly says sending both.. I'll leave it at this..
I prefer to teach a man to fish over just handing out fish.
The "spark" was to lead them think/test/learn/solve.
If the unit does require the intermediate cert, then that is a problem.
But... if it can be fed both intermediates, then either cert path would work.
How? Because the certificate is ultimately signed by just one of them. Sending a useless intermediate too doesn't make the fact that the server is trusting the incorrect certs go away. If a good intermediate in the chain doesn't work, why would sending an incorrect intermediate too matter at all?
That is not done from the server.
It gets done however the device allows:
My thought-provoking comment was to do just that provoke thought; Which might lead to testing which could lead to learning and ultimately lead to solving the problem.
@ashuec90 maybe I am missing something, but why not just the Trusted Root Anchor Certificates?
Try pinning both.
If “the device” doesn’t need a publicity trusted CA, consider setting up a dedicated private CA by your organization. Then you have total control and ease the reconfiguring of devices as you know all the pieces and make them deterministic.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.