full-disclosure - Re: Mutt: failure to check server certificate in SMTP TLS connection

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 00:40:06 +1100
From: dave b <db.pub.mail@...il.com>
To: Honza Horak <hhorak@...hat.com>
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Mutt: failure to check server certificate in
 SMTP TLS connection

> Hi,
>
> I've tested this behaviour using both - gnutls and openssl - and it seems
> like the only difference is that there is an error printed using openssl:
> "Certificate host check failed: certificate owner does not match hostname
> imap.myhost.web".
>
> In both cases a user can accept the certificate, but there is no warning
> about certificate's hostname mishmash using gnutls, which is a
> vulnerability.
>
> I just wanted to sum up the issue, do I understand it correctly?
>

Yes and no. The thing is with gnutls if the certificate is valid for
another host - like I had in my test example then gnutls will not show
the error and will continue as if there is no error.
Obviously if the host has a certificate that is not 'valid' (e.g. self
signed) mutt will
prompt and ask for you to accept it first .

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