All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
The differences between DV, OV and EV certificates for TLS
Since this seems to be a recurring topic here on LET, I figured people might find this article relevant: Looking for value in EV certificates
Below are some relevant excerpts in particular, for those who are in a hurry. I do recommend reading the entire post linked above, though - it goes further into HPKP, how users perceive different certificates, the relation to phishing, and so on.
DV (Domain Validation):
DV certificates are issued with little to no human interaction from the CA, and can often be automated from the requester’s side as well. Protocols such as ACME allow a fully automated request & issuance process, allowing you to easily request and update certificates – the process can be scheduled and handled without a human involved at all.
OV (Organizational Validation):
An Organizational Validation (also known as High Assurance) certificate is quite a bit more expensive at roughly $200 (though may be as much as $500) per year, and is more complex to request due to additional paperwork involved. The increase in price compared to DV is largely due to the extra work required as part of the verification process; in addition to validating control of the domain, the CA will also verify documents that prove the requester is a legally formed entity (via licenses or incorporation documents).
EV (Extended Validation):
Finally, we have EV, the most expensive at roughly $300 (though may be as much as $1,000) per year, EV certificates require the most detailed verification process, and extend upon the requirements of OV certificates. Documents such as proof of having a bank account, proof of address, more detailed requirements on proof of incorporation, proof that the person requesting the certificate is an employee and properly authorized to request the certificate may be required.
On the practical differences and value:
The value of OV is questionable at best, and for how it’s used today, it really isn’t any better than DV despite the marketing hype. Much to the chagrin of CAs, OV certificates are given the same treatment that DV certificates receive in browsers – there’s no visible difference between them, so users are completely unaware that you’ve spent the extra money on the OV certificate.
[...]
EV certificates on the other hand do receive special treatment by browsers:
[...]
With a substantial difference in price and marketing, do OV and EV certificates provide better security? No.
No matter how you look at it, no matter how it’s marketed, the fact is that all three certificate types provide the exact same level of security. The only real difference between them is that OV and EV certificates contain an extra identifier that tells the browser which type of certificate it is. The encryption is the same, there’s no change in the security of the connection between the browser and server.
[...]
With this limited value, it’s difficult to determine if it’s worth the expense – if you are protecting a highly sensitive system, preventing even a single phishing attack could justify the expense, for other systems, it may in fact be a waste of money. As such, it is up to site operators to determine if the small impact that it provides justifies the expense and work required.
Comments
I agree with your point.
The only one that make difference is EV in desktop. Many of my friend trained to trust EV more for ecommerce site
What do you mean by desktop ??
There is no difference in certificates (DV, OV, EV) appearance on mobile devices.
Just like @hostens said
???
Depends on device and the browser.
What device and what browser are we talking here?
Tested android, iphone (chrome, firefox) didnt notice any different on EV vs standart SSL
EV helps to verify that the entity you're dealing with is a legally registered one. An additional and welcome security measure to prevent phishing.
Pavin.
Did you actually read the referenced article? The whole point is that it doesn't actually do that in practice.
At this point it should be clear, the value proposition for EV certificates isn’t in technical security, it’s a potential boost to user awareness – the opportunity it gives users to make a more informed decision before they provide sensitive information is an edge over OV and DV certificates.
Yes, except in practice it doesn't do that. Plus, EV isn't necessary to provide assurance of being 'legally registered' (that's what OV is for...), and on top of all of that there's a myriad of other problems with it: the prohibitive cost for smaller/non-commercial operations, the registration of lookalike names, and so on and so forth.
In theory it sounds nice, but in practice "setting up a fake company" isn't exactly a high bar for a dedicated phisher to meet.
Which makes me wonder - how does an EV provider actually check the validity of the supplied docs, especially for entities on different countries?
Kappa
I don't know for specific, but https://certsimple.com/?country-code=MY has some secret sauce to do validation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Validation_Certificate#Issuing_criteria
That's the criteria - but how does one validate the info? I.e. how do you know it's not a scammer sending you false docs?
ev and ov may have the same encryption level as dv certs but they do have the additional background checks that dv certs don't have. the cert owner has been more thoroughly authenticated. i don't see how you can say that doesn't give you additional security?
I believe this is outlined here.
You would, if you'd read the article.
OK I read it and I disagree with it. If you manage to get control over a domain's DNS you can get a DV cert issued for it very quickly. But you can't get an EV cert issued. So looking for an EV cert on a site definitely gives you that extra bit of confidence in that site's security.
Sigh. You don't seem to understand it at all.
It doesn't matter how difficult it is to get verified, because neither the browser nor the user will care. I don't need to get an EV certificate issued, because I can just get a DV certificate, and browsers will consider it just as valid, and users won't know the difference.
Clear now?
There's reasonable evidence that users do care, perhaps noticing the green bar subconsciously while having no idea what it actually signifies, but they are responsive to it. Sites that use it sell more stuff, etc.
Jesus christ, does nobody in this thread actually read the article that the thread is about?
Perhaps this thread should just be closed, because all it seems to be doing is attracting poorly thought-out comments.
I didn't see any reason to read the article. There's a gazillion articles out there that I'll never have time to read, and that one didn't even sound especially informative. I feel reasonably well informed on the topic, to the point where it didn't seem likely that the article would tell me anything interesting that I didn't already know. It sounds like it even says things that I know are wrong (lots of articles say wrong things, so that's not especially surprising).
If you think the article actually says something relevant informative, I'd appreciate a concrete example (please keep it to 140 characters or less) instead of telling me to go read the whole damn article and download whatever megabytes of web bloat that might accompany it.
Most of these comments make sense and incorporate interesting viewpoints from the soft science of consumer psychology.
The article is just quoting individual laboratory studies to make various conclusions - but science relies on studies that are repeated and reviewed. Peer reviewing criticizes studies for being culture-specific, biased, incorrectly executed, etc. You can cherry pick a specific study to fit any conclusion you want.
Like Clouvider said, some browsers have it...?
some browser or just safari?
EV SSL Certificates can be bought by individuals or organizations that have their legal identity and existence, operational existence as well domain ownership. so by this certificate, you can trust the website that it is original not a fake site.
Well I care. A lot of tech savvy users will care. That's the point I'm trying to make.
That article is about the masses who won't care even if they have to click away an SSL cert warning. So should we all use self-signed certs now?
Domain Validation SSL certificate doesn't require in-depth details while issuing it for the domain. It only verifies the domain name with domain registry information. It will take less issuance time like 5 to 10 min and the cost is also less compared to OV and EV SSL certificate.
Organization Validation SSL certificate verifies the business information through business registry databases. It will take issuance time of 2 to 3 days and it's price little bit high compared to domain validation SSL certificate.
Extended Validation (EV) SSL certificate verifies the business identity in depth by company vetting process. It will display organization name in the green bar which helps to boost user's trust towards the website but its price is little high compared to OV SSL certificate. It will take issuance time of 3 to 5 days.
Not browser but user especially technical will care.
Self-signed certificate also shows warning in the browser. And read about disadvantages of self-signed certificate.
woosh!