full-disclosure - SSL VPNs and security

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20060609185553.GH3313@sentinelchicken.org>
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