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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <AANLkTimaCROCOg=4qKd5=jJrLQtxg=hSN1UH84kkc17q@mail.gmail.com> 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists