Re: explicitly including other ciphers for use with https

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



what if one simply doesn't care if the data is encrypted during transmission?. The data I move to an object store, basically files, could already be stored encrypted. Also, hardware encrypters don't have a need for encrypting data again. Encrypting it again is just a waste of A LOT of bandwith. However the passwords still need to be encrypted and encrypting TBs of data because I need an 8-16 token password encrypted is just a little silly


I think a lot of people here are confusing 'network with "world wide web' and therefore NULL ciphers are unsafe

This is just a bunch of hardware, with connections between it's nodes.
The whole thing/cluster is not connected to anything 'internet', not even LAN. I worry about those connections being secure as much as I worry about security between a disk-controller and a hard drive.

On 12/08/2015 12:15 PM, Jacob Champion wrote:
On 12/07/2015 09:54 PM, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
On Dec 7, 2015 11:36 PM, "Marat Khalili" <mkh@xxxxxx
<mailto:mkh@xxxxxx>> wrote:
 >>
 >> Everything *after* that handshake, in cleartext, is open for
inspection or for manipulation
 >
 > Are you sure about the manipulation part? Why do you think encryption
helps here then?

To turn the question around, what gives you the suggestion that the user
agent or the httpd server would notice any modification of plaintext
bytes in transit through a router or other network intermediate?

I would _expect_ that clients using an eNULL ciphersuite would check the
MAC that is transferred as part of the TLS record. I would further
expect the MAC to have been computed using a secret that was set up
during the initial handshake, so that it cannot be faked by an
intermediary who has been watching the stream. That's what I meant when
I said that NULL encryption should have (AFAIK) no effect on the authn
and integrity characteristics of the ciphersuites. It should only affect
the confidentiality.

But I'm not an expert in TLS -- do you know of a reason that eNULL
ciphersuites have weaker guarantees on their integrity checks? If so,
I'd really like to know... This is the second time in a week that
someone has told me that eNULL ciphers provide effectively no security,
and up to this point I have believed otherwise.

(As an experiment, I compiled httpd to allow eNULL ciphersuites and
captured an s_client conversation with dumpcap. Wireshark immediately
"decrypted" the plaintext data but showed that there was still a MAC
appended to each record. Modifying a single byte of that data caused
Wireshark to fail its "decryption" of that record.)

--Jacob

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Open SSH Users]     [Linux ACPI]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Laptop]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Squid]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux