Sorry to call this out, but my name is "William" not "Bill". I have personal reasons to dislike being called that name. Regardless, happy to help out :) > On 23 Apr 2021, at 22:11, Trevor Vaughan <tvaughan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Bill and Pierre, > > Thanks for the responses! > > It sounds like I have to figure out how to configure the NSS library for 389-DS specifically. > > In EL8+ I know that I can configure the global crypto policy but I'm hoping that I can do it for the specific application. I haven't found anything in the documentation so far but at least this gets me pointed in the right direction. > > Thanks, > > Trevor > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 4:42 AM Pierre Rogier <progier@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Trevor, > > I do not think it is possible to specify the cypher order negotiation: > I am not sure whether TLS protocol allow to specify an order when negotiating the cypher, > but at 389 level there is no way to specify an order: > The NSS security layer provides the list of supported cypher and 389 use > nsSSL3Ciphers config parameter to enable/disable theses cyphers in the list (without changing the order) > > So my feeling is that if there is an order it is up to the different > security layer implementations and may differs between the applications, > > Regards, > Pierre > > On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 7:28 PM Trevor Vaughan <tvaughan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi William, > > In terms of the STARTTLS bits (in theory) properly configuring your client software mitigates the password leak risk. But this also happens with pure (non-RFC) LDAPS connections. > > The docs note that minssf applies to the crypto required bits as well as the SASL layer. > > Ignoring most of that, my issue is that I don't understand why I have to nail my client software to ciphers explicitly known by 389-DS instead of the two negotiating the strongest things possible out of the gate. > > For instance, if I use AES256 with a minssf=256, everything works just fine. > > But, if I use AES128:AES256:@STRENGTH (which should sort strongest to weakest) then access is denied. > > How do I get 389-DS to negotiate the strongest ciphers first (regardless of the method)? > > Thanks, > > Trevor > > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 7:34 PM William Brown <wbrown@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi there, > > > On 22 Apr 2021, at 03:52, Trevor Vaughan <tvaughan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > OS Version: CentOS 8 > > 389-DS Version: 1.4.3.22 from EPEL > > > > I have a server set up with minssf=256 and have been surprised that either 389-DS, or openssl, does not appear to be doing what I would consider a logical TLS negotiation. > > > > I had thought that the system would start with the strongest cipher and then negotiate down to something that was acceptable. > > > > Instead, I'm finding that I have to nail up the ciphers to something that the 389-DS server both recognizes and is within the expected SSF. > > > > Is this expected behavior or do I have something configured incorrectly? > > That's not what minssf does. > > minssf says "during a bind operation, reject if the encryption strength used is less than 256 bits or equivalent". > > The "bit strength" is arbitrary though, because it's a concept from sasl, and generally is very broken. > > Remember, minssf does NOT do what you think though! Because bind is the *first* message on the wire, the series of operations is > > > client server > open plain text conn -> > <- accept connection > send bind on conn -> > <- reject due to minsff too weak. > > > So you have already leaked the password! > > > The only way to ensure this does not occur is to set "nsslapd-port: 0" which disables plaintext. Then you *only* use ldaps on port 636, which is guarantee encrypted from the start. > > It is worth noting that the use of starttls over ldap, does *NOT* mitigate this issue, for a similar reason. > > > Caveat: If you are using kerberos/gssapi you can NOT disable plaintext ldap due to these protocols attempting to install their own encryption layers. > > > Hope that helps, > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Trevor > > > > -- > > Trevor Vaughan > > Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc > > (410) 541-6699 x788 > > > > -- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information -- > > _______________________________________________ > > 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > > — > Sincerely, > > William Brown > > Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server > SUSE Labs, Australia > _______________________________________________ > 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > > > -- > Trevor Vaughan > Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc > (410) 541-6699 x788 > > -- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information -- > _______________________________________________ > 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > > > -- > -- > > 389 Directory Server Development Team > _______________________________________________ > 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure > > > -- > Trevor Vaughan > Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc > (410) 541-6699 x788 > > -- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information -- > _______________________________________________ > 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure — Sincerely, William Brown Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server SUSE Labs, Australia _______________________________________________ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
