Why are certificates often given long lifespans despite best practices?

Certificates are often assigned long lifespans primarily because of the cumbersome generation process involved. Creating and managing certificates can be complex and resource-intensive, particularly in environments where many systems or services require secure connections. Organizations may opt for longer-lived certificates to reduce the frequency of renewals and the operational overhead associated with redeploying new certificates. This convenience can be appealing, especially for teams that might not have automated processes in place for certificate management or who are dealing with legacy systems.

While it's true that extended lifespans may conflict with best practices—such as regularly rotating certificates to minimize risk in the event of a compromise—the operational realities often lead organizations to choose longer durations to streamline their workload. This choice may result in a trade-off between security and convenience, as security best practices typically recommend shorter lifespans to reduce potential exposure.

The other choices, while relevant in other contexts, do not encompass the primary reason for lengthy certificate lifespans as effectively. Cost considerations, compatibility across platforms, or ease of automated deployments may influence decisions in different ways, but they do not capture the impetus driven by the intricate nature of the certificate generation process itself.