|
RE: German Key Usage: msg#00260ietf.x509
At 05:53 PM 8/14/98 -0400, Flanigan, Bill wrote: > This is just the start of "our" key collection. Not only do we >have three (and counting) for PKIs, we have two (and counting?) for IPSec, >one (and counting for TLS?), etc. Whatever happened to the concept of just >(gasp) two keys, one for Dsigs and the other for enciperment? Even that's >enough to choke the infrastructure. > Comments? Yes bill: >From CRYPTO-GRAM, August 15, 1998 >"Protocol Interactions and the Chosen Protocol Attack" > >J. Kelsey, B. Schneier, and D. Wagner, Security Protocols, 5th >International Workshop April 1997 Proceedings, Springer-Verlag, 1998, pp. 91--104. > >Many systems use the same crypto keys for different protocols (e.g. both SSL and S/MIME use the same public-key certificate). This paper presents attacks on protocol interactions. An attacker can create a new protocol that is individually strong, but which breaks a target protocol when both are run using the same keys. The paper concludes with a discussion of design principles to resist this class of attack. > > >http://www.counterpane.com/chosen_protocol.html > So this might actually be the right thing to do.... Robert Moskowitz ICSA Security Interest EMail: rgm-sec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | Re: Authentication vs. binding signature, and ephemeral vs. permanent key usage: 00260, Peter Gutmann |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: German Key Usage: 00260, Robert Moskowitz |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: German Key Usagei: 00260, Flanigan, Bill |
| Next by Thread: | Re: German Key Usage: 00260, -=jack=- |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |