What is the problem with truncated 96-bit HMAC value? Sent?from?my?BlackBerry?10?smartphone?on?the Verizon?Wireless?4G?LTE?network. From: Jakob Bohm Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2016 19:25 To: openssl-users at openssl.org Reply To: openssl-users at openssl.org Subject: Re: openSSL and SLOTH attack On 07/01/2016 23:06, jonetsu wrote: Does this mean that running 1.01e in FIPS mode is protected regarding this SLOTH attack ? Does FIPS mode prevent use of MD5: Yes. Does FIPS mode prevent insecure uses of SHA-1 (a FIPS algorithm): No. Does FIPS mode prevent the SSL/TLS handshake from using 96 bit truncated HMAC values: Probably not. Does FIPS mode prevent use of the insecurely designed 'tls-unique' feature: Probably not. Enjoy Jakob -- Jakob Bohm, CIO, Partner, WiseMo A/S. https://www.wisemo.com Transformervej 29, 2860 S?borg, Denmark. Direct +45 31 13 16 10 This public discussion message is non-binding and may contain errors. WiseMo - Remote Service Management for PCs, Phones and Embedded -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-users/attachments/20160108/18a28d0b/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 4350 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-users/attachments/20160108/18a28d0b/attachment.bin>
