BLU Discuss list archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Discuss] Why the dislike of X.509?
- Subject: [Discuss] Why the dislike of X.509?
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 14:32:38 -0400
- In-reply-to: <sjmvbpcbji2.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org>
- References: <53F9F6B9.4060505@stephenadler.com> <20140824161132.GE14848@randomstring.org> <be314521ab6bebb6add54d706b042f01.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com> <53FA1C3B.70908@gmail.com> <53FB19E5.4080602@aeminium.org> <53FB4A5D.2030305@gmail.com> <CA+h9Qs5GnC6d1ejBQC=crtHwxoDiFWo4Kn+xjt0eiA8Kr733_A@mail.gmail.com> <53FB70E6.50706@gmail.com> <sjmmwarchcd.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org> <53FE1FCB.7010405@gmail.com> <sjmvbpcbji2.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org>
On 8/28/2014 1:40 PM, Derek Atkins wrote: > Passwords? We don't need no stinking passwords! You don't need to know > your user's passwords, you have access to their keys! If I could dump a > copy of your KDC database then I could then impersonate any user (or > server!) on your network and read all their traffic. I don't need to > know their passwords to do that. I don't have their keys. I have one-way hashes of their keys. And your hypothetical dump will have the same one-way hashes. No, that wouldn't keep you from exploiting the compromise but it would slow you down. > A bad actor can do *everything* with a compromised KDC. Yes, there are > steps to prevent compromise, just like there are steps to prevent > compromise of an X.509 CA. The main difference here is that if I Except there aren't. X.509 lacks mechanisms to prevent and detect root certificate compromises. It was intentionally designed this way. It was designed this way so that, for example, government oversight and the NSA can decrypt all messages within the agencies under their authority. This all happens silently, undetectable by affected users, by design. Attempts have been made to address this design "feature". None to date have proven consistently reliable. -- Rich P.
- Follow-Ups:
- [Discuss] Why the dislike of X.509?
- From: warlord at MIT.EDU (Derek Atkins)
- [Discuss] Why the dislike of X.509?
- From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker)
- [Discuss] Why the dislike of X.509?
- References:
- [Discuss] vnc
- From: adler at stephenadler.com (Stephen Adler)
- [Discuss] vnc
- From: dsr at randomstring.org (Dan Ritter)
- [Discuss] vnc
- From: markw at mohawksoft.com (markw at mohawksoft.com)
- [Discuss] vnc
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- [Discuss] vnc
- From: nuno at aeminium.org (Nuno Sucena Almeida)
- [Discuss] Why the dislike of X.509?
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- [Discuss] Why the dislike of X.509?
- From: jabr at blu.org (John Abreau)
- [Discuss] Why the dislike of X.509?
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- [Discuss] Why the dislike of X.509?
- From: warlord at MIT.EDU (Derek Atkins)
- [Discuss] Why the dislike of X.509?
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- [Discuss] Why the dislike of X.509?
- From: warlord at MIT.EDU (Derek Atkins)
- [Discuss] vnc
- Prev by Date: [Discuss] firewalld
- Next by Date: [Discuss] Why the dislike of X.509?
- Previous by thread: [Discuss] Why the dislike of X.509?
- Next by thread: [Discuss] Why the dislike of X.509?
- Index(es):