Simon Hearne

Web Performance Architect

Email Twitter LinkedIn Github RSS

The Performance Cost of EV Certificates

Published

Extended Validation certificates are expensive and degrade performance. Move to an OV certificate if you can!

❤️ 45 likes 🔁 11 reposts 💬 2 comments 🔗 7 shares as of 11:00, November 26


Introduction

Extended Validation or EV Certificates were once prized for their impression of increased security. Sites with an EV certificate would be rewarded with a nice green padlock and their company name in the address bar, potentially giving customers an increased sense of security when making purchases or entering sensitive data.

screenshot of address bar showing paypal inc company name
EV Certificates used to give a benefit in the address bar

If you load a page on a domain with an EV certificate now, you will notice there is no longer a nice green padlock and the company name. This change rolled out in Chrome 77 way back in September 2019. Other browsers have followed suit, now a secure page (using any certificate type) will have a small indicator, normally a padlock, and non-secure pages will be highlighted as Not Secure.

screenshot of address bar showing not secure for http page
Non-secure domains are highlighted to the user

The rise of free certificates

There are three primary types of certificate used to secure web traffic:

  • Domain Validation (DV) validates that the certificate requestor owns the domain
  • Organisation Validation (OV) validates that an organisation owns the domain
  • Extended Validation (EV) validates that an organisation owns the domain, with rigorous validation

DV certificates just require you to prove that you own a domain: using a DNS record, a redirect or a file on your web server. This process can be completely automated. EV and OV certificates require some manual intervention and further checks at renewal.

The screenshots from Chrome below show the information provided to the user for these different certificate types.

screenshot of address bar showing not secure for http page
DV cert info in Chrome
screenshot of address bar showing not secure for http page
OV cert info in Chrome
screenshot of address bar showing not secure for http page
EV cert info in Chrome

Making the web secure by default is an initiative I wholly support. Let’s Encrypt is a non-profit certificate authority which allows any website owner to create a DV certificate for free. This makes it easier than ever to deliver pages over secure connections - preventing man-in-the-middle attacks and allowing the use of HTTP/2 which only works over TLS. Let’s Encrypt is already integrated into most hosting providers and CDNs.

Extended Validation certificates are expensive; they require a legal entity to prove that they own the domain which requires some human intervention. At the time of writing, this results in an EV certificate costing about $125 USD per year. This is not a huge cost, but is infinitely more than free!

So what’s the problem?

The performance challenge of EV certificates is that they do not fully support OCSP stapling. The online certificate status protocol is a method which allows clients like web browsers to ensure that certificates are valid, by checking with the certificate authority that it has not been revoked. Stapling allows the web server to perform this validation on the server-side and send the validation with the certificate. Without stapling the client has to do the validation. This can be seen in your web performance waterfalls as one or two (or more!) requests which occur during the TLS negotiation of the connection.

This abridged waterfall shows a webpagetest run at 3G speed against PayPal.com. The OCSP revalidation check takes almost a full second, over half of the TTFB for the response and 42% of the whole response.

waterfall of paypal.com showing almost one second of time lost to OCSP revalidation
OCSP checks impact TTFB

This effect is more pronounced on high-latency connections. The latency here is not just based on the network connection, but also the distance between the user and the OCSP service. Digicert in this case uses Verizon’s CDN which has 165 global points of presence (PoPs). Users in Western Australia, most of Africa, Canada and the former Soviet Union will have worse experiences than those in Europe and the United States.

OCSP responses are generally valid for seven days, so the impact will be mostly felt by first-time visitors.

It is likely that moving from an EV certificate to organisation validation (OV) certificate will reduce costs and improve performance.

Note that OCSP stapling must be enabled on your TLS terminating endpoint (e.g. your firewall or CDN) for it to work on DV and OV certificates. You can check your current certificate using the Qualys SSL Server Test.

For simplicity I have ignored some of the intricacies of how OCSP works with intermediary certificates, and some of the many edge cases that occur with OCSP stapling. Matt Hobbs goes into much more detail in his blog post on certificate revocation if you crave more technical detail!


Join the conversation

The comments on this page are fed by tweets, using brid.gy, webmention.io and a modified version of jekyll-webmention_io. To comment, just send a webmention or use a link below to interact via twitter.




Recent comments

  1. Michael Crenshaw

    iirc, OCSP checks in WPT aren’t generalizable - caching and pinning make sure most users won’t encounter the extra delay. But yeah as far as I can tell, there’s no downside to avoiding EV.

    reply
  2. Perf Bytes Matter

    Any idea why that call is seen on wpt but not devtools ? We thought perhaps the calls might be quite platform specific though I’m not sure

    reply

Recent shares