full-disclosure - Re: FD / lists.grok.org

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <9066.1231184802@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2009 14:46:42 -0500
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To: Tim <tim-security@...tinelchicken.org>
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: FD / lists.grok.org - bad SSL cert

On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:25:58 PST, Tim said:
> Uh, no, actually CAs provide some weak assurance that the certificate is
> the real one and associated with that server.  A self-signed one
> provides none.  If you can't, in some way, authenticate the certificate
> then SSL is not any better than sending data plain text.

It's *slightly* better, in that it guards against passive sniffing attacks
on the data in transit. You're right that it doesn't guard against an
active MITM attack.

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

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