AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Apple handshaker12/25/2023 Some bring us happiness, provide us with loving support or at the least offer help. On a daily basis, we come into contact with a range of people, in a range of contexts and situations. Every now and then a transition is made from a badly insecure product to a more secure one - the transition of old Microsoft Office file formats to the new ones comes to mind - but the transitions are painful and I bet, if there isn't a very powerful party to force things, like Microsoft with their Office code, the transition just won't happen.People around you shape you! As social beings, we are interdependent on those around us and more often than not our relationships with others are what give our lives a certain meaning. Make a new fixed-up and clean TLS 2.0 and nobody will use it. Too many people rely on the messy TLS we have right now to change it on the fly. Unfortunately, it's a bit like SMTP, whose problems we are doomed to suffer for all eternity. The protocol came first, then the analysis of it. Over the years features and fixes have been added mostly because someone demanded them, not because any clear review was given to what we need TLS to do. Recall that TLS began life as a hack built by Netscape for their browser in the days when version 0.1 was good enough to ship. Does that clear things up?īut Green argues that the problem is the mess the protocol has become. Some notable status reports:ĭelignat-Lavaud, Bhargavan and Pironti's diagram of the Triple handshake. Of course we know that Apple's was affected and has now been fixed. Not all TLS implementations and applications are affected, though a large number are. Which implementations are affected and which have been remediated? Delignat-Lavaud, Bhargavan and Pironti maintain a partial list in the "Disclosure and Vendor Response" section of their web site. And it affects many TLS implementations. Yes, it requires that the attacker be in a privileged position, but effectively Heartbleed does too, because you need to get the traffic somehow in order to decode it. It's a man-in-the-middle attack with full takeover control. I'm not going to try and elaborate on the explanation, as I don't think there's any simple and honest way to explain the mechanism. Scared of the dark? You won't be if you get one of our favorite flashlights How to convert your home's old TV cabling into powerful Ethernet lines This company successfully switched to a four-day workweek. This tech CEO fired two engineers for having second full-time jobs, warns they're part of a new trend Read far more gritty detail on the attack, variants of it, and the progress of remediation at their web site. To prevent attacks based on this scenario, Secure Transport was changed so that, by default, a renegotiation must present the same server certificate as was presented in the original connection.ĭelignat-Lavaud, Bhargavan and Pironti found this a while ago and, in the best traditions of research, have been disclosing it confidentially to those responsible for affected software. In a 'triple handshake' attack, it was possible for an attacker to establish two connections which had the same encryption keys and handshake, insert the attacker's data in one connection, and renegotiate so that the connections may be forwarded to each other. (He has also decided to learn one lesson from Heartbleed: When it comes to bugs, branding is key, and so he calls it "3Shake" and has commissioned the nearby logo.)Īpple credits the report of the bug, now CVE-2014-1295, to Antoine Delignat-Lavaud, Karthikeyan Bhargavan, and Alfredo Pironti of Prosecco at Inria Paris, and describes it in this way: Professor/Cryptographer Matthew Green of Johns Hopkins says that the triple handshake changes our concept of what security means in the context of TLS.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |