Eric Rescorla wrote on 08 August 2008 16:06:
> At Fri, 8 Aug 2008 11:50:59 +0100,
> Ben Laurie wrote:
>> However, since the CRLs will almost certainly not be checked, this
>> means the site will still be vulnerable to attack for the lifetime of
>> the certificate (and perhaps beyond, depending on user
>> behaviour). Note that shutting down the site DOES NOT prevent the attack.
>>
>> Therefore mitigation falls to other parties.
>>
>> 1. Browsers must check CRLs by default.
>
> Isn't this a good argument for blacklisting the keys on the client
> side?
Isn't that exactly what "Browsers must check CRLs" means in this context
anyway? What alternative client-side blacklisting mechanism do you suggest?
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....
