
oss-sec mailing list archives
CVE's for SSLv2 support
From: Kurt Seifried <kseifried () redhat com>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 10:33:17 -0700
So there is this proposed RFC: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6176 TL;DR: SSLv2 needs to be shot. Now we have yet another significant SSLv2 problem, DROWN, bad enough in fact that Red Hat has now disabled SSLv2 in OpenSSL by default (already done in NSS/GnuTLS), so from my vendor perspective, we're treating SSLv2 support as a security problem, the solution of which is to remove said support. But more generally, should we look at assigning CVE's for support of SSLv2, much like we would for products supporting DES or other known insecure cryptographic algorithms, hashes, digests and protocols? My personal vote is for yes. -- Kurt Seifried -- Red Hat -- Product Security -- Cloud PGP A90B F995 7350 148F 66BF 7554 160D 4553 5E26 7993 Red Hat Product Security contact: secalert () redhat com
Current thread:
- CVE's for SSLv2 support Kurt Seifried (Mar 01)
- Re: CVE's for SSLv2 support Loganaden Velvindron (Mar 01)
- Re: CVE's for SSLv2 support Grant Ridder (Mar 01)
- Re: CVE's for SSLv2 support Stuart Henderson (Mar 01)
- Re: CVE's for SSLv2 support gremlin (Mar 01)
- Re: CVE's for SSLv2 support cve-assign (Mar 01)
- Re: CVE's for SSLv2 support Kurt Seifried (Mar 01)
- Re: CVE's for SSLv2 support cve-assign (Mar 01)
- Re: CVE's for SSLv2 support Kurt Seifried (Mar 01)
- Re: CVE's for SSLv2 support cve-assign (Mar 01)
- Re: Re: CVE's for SSLv2 support Tim (Mar 01)
- Re: CVE's for SSLv2 support Kurt Seifried (Mar 01)
- Re: CVE's for SSLv2 support Loganaden Velvindron (Mar 01)