full-disclosure - Re: Creating a rogue CA certificate

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: <11002.66.193.105.132.1230668197.squirrel@www.slave-tothe-box.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 13:16:37 -0700 (MST)
From: jlay@...ve-tothe-box.net
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Creating a rogue CA certificate

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> SSL/PKI is only as strong as the weakest CA...
>
> For those of you who haven't been following this, here you go:
>
> http://www.win.tue.nl/hashclash/rogue-ca/
> http://www.phreedom.org/research/rogue-ca/md5-collisions-1.0.ppt
>
> Enjoy and Happy New Years!
>
> elazar
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Charset: UTF8
> Version: Hush 3.0
> Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify
>
> wpwEAQECAAYFAklaVFQACgkQi04xwClgpZh4TQP+ODe2/jTHhOrLbKtoSJhZInX+lJXt
> LMkU/xlYK1Au/f1E5KhXt43uMWYSeC/M0njQRPLyrDfihFlLsmAxGK/97kRQfxEttbcN
> R0q1BL+WmbiGNglujzSWHqMSkn20r12itVfGP77nEbGYbjidV1BXxFNR2QQwLHZhGLWe
> gVO/5Zg=
> =+Pm+
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> --
> Click for free info on getting an MBA, $200K/ year potential.
>  http://tagline.hushmail.com/fc/PnY6qxsZwUN6299xt0fJO8HvJUKovV4hcZ7MH3I6KbhlC0IDsYiG8/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
>
>

>>From Microsoft: 
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/advisory/961509.mspx

"Microsoft is not aware of specific attacks against MD5, so previously
issued certificates that were signed using MD5 are not affected and do not
need to be revoked. This issue only affects certificates being signed
using MD5 after the publication of the attack method."

I take it the above is incorrect?

James

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/