Re: SCRAM with channel binding downgrade attack

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Peter Eisentraut
Тема Re: SCRAM with channel binding downgrade attack
Дата
Msg-id 23820cef-365b-672a-8cbf-7eb0ce2eca38@2ndquadrant.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: SCRAM with channel binding downgrade attack  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
Ответы Re: SCRAM with channel binding downgrade attack  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
Re: SCRAM with channel binding downgrade attack  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 6/28/18 09:35, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> No, we absolutely still have SCRAM channel binding.
> 
> *libpq* has no way to *enforce* it, meaning it always acts like our
> default SSL config which is "use it if available but if it's not then
> silently accept the downgrade". From a security perspective, it's just
> as bad as our default ssl config, but unlike ssl you can't configure a
> requirement in 11.

Isn't this similar to what happened whenever we added a new or better
password method?  A MITM that didn't want to bother cracking MD5 could
just alter the stream and request "password" authentication.  Same with
MD5->SCRAM, SCRAM->SCRAM+CB, and even a hypothetical future change in
the SCRAM hashing method.  Clearly, we need a more comprehensive
solution for this.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Masahiko Sawada
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query
Следующее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: SCRAM with channel binding downgrade attack