| 1 |
> > These certificates are a very stupid thing. They are utterly |
| 2 |
> > complicated, you have to self-sign them which produces warnings, and |
| 3 |
> > they require to have the host name within them as if the host wasn't |
| 4 |
> > known by several different names. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Use LetsEncrypt then, you can add any number of host names you want, as |
| 7 |
> far as I know. But you need a temporary web server to prove ownership |
| 8 |
> of the server/hostname and sign the certificates. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
As an alternative you can publish a DNS record, rather than providing a web |
| 12 |
server. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I like https to distribute fires - its easiest for the users, and no client |
| 15 |
end setup required. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
If there are many files just zip them up as most users can handle that too, |
| 18 |
and zip clients are build into most OSes. |
Archives