Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Security team successfully cracks SSL using 200 PS3's and MD5
From: Matthew Kaufman <matthew () eeph com>
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2009 13:39:08 -0800

Randy Bush wrote:
perhaps i am a bit slow. but could someone explain to me how trust in dns data transfers to trust in an http partner and other uses to which ssl is put?

randy


It wouldn't, which is why the original suggestion is a bad idea.

They're different issues (finding the actual address of the server you want to talk to vs. authenticating that the server is the server you want to talk to), and the trust doesn't transfer for multiple reasons.

Mostly it isn't a good idea because there's a big "too many eggs in one basket" problem here... compromise of the DNS root keys not only would cause address lookups to be as insecure as they are now (which still works much of the time for many people), but inserting fake self-signed certs becomes trivial.

This is nearly as bad as the argument I've seen that if we had DNSSEC we wouldn't even need SSL's authentication, because you'd be sure you were talking to the right server (never mind that there's demonstrated examples of just how easy it is to reroute someone else's packets from far away). Of course we could secure the entire routing system as well...

Matthew Kaufman


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]