lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri Jun 9 19:56:03 2006 From: tim-security at sentinelchicken.org (Tim) Subject: SSL VPNs and security > Sure, it's trivial to create self-signed certs (or run a CA), but > distributing your cert (or the CA cert) to all but a handful of clients > is a logistical nightmare. For company managed laptops, it is trivial to distribute via normal software distribution processes. For non-managed systems (which you shouldn't allow into your network via a VPN anyway), installing a CA cert is as simple as clicking on a link ONCE, and installing the cert. This cert can be distributed over a VeriSign secured SSL connection. Then when the website presents a page, it can dynamically sign certs for each domain. This stuff isn't really that hard. The tools that the industry has provided users just suck, that's all. > If you're going to be installing stuff, might as well make that a > IKE/IPSEC client and do it the right way to begin with. Well, I don't disagree with this one, but so many people who complain about certificate distribution have not thought through the ways it can happen. Even with a real VPN, you really should be using client certs anyway, which present the same distribution problems. These problems aren't made any easier by using a "trustyworthy" CA which charges you. The software you use is the biggest contributor to management headaches. tim
Powered by blists - more mailing lists