Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 17 May 2015 13:50:25 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Roger Marquis <marquis@roble.com>
To:        Mark Felder <feld@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Forums.FreeBSD.org - SSL Issue?
In-Reply-To: <1431894012.1947726.271026057.54BB4786@webmail.messagingengine.com>
References:  <CACRVPYOALi-V8D34zeJTYdSwHshYrqtttqVV3=aP8Yb6ZAxfyg@mail.gmail.com> <2857899F-802E-4086-AD41-DD76FACD44FB@modirum.com> <05636D22-BBC3-4A15-AC44-0F39FB265CDF@patpro.net> <20150514193706.V69409@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <F2460C80-969A-46DF-A44F-6C3D381ABDC3@patpro.net> <5554879D.7060601@obluda.cz> <1431697272.3528812.269632617.29548DB0@webmail.messagingengine.com> <5556E5DC.7090809@obluda.cz> <1431894012.1947726.271026057.54BB4786@webmail.messagingengine.com>

| previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> You're not understanding the situation: the vulnerability isn't in
> OpenSSL; it's a design flaw / weakness in the protocol. This is why
> everyone is running like mad from SSL 3.0 and TLS 1.0.

Right, there are two issues being discussed that should be separated.
The thread was originally about SSL version weaknesses and the rational
for that (keeping v1.0 around for the near term) was described quite
well.

The second issue was regarding base and ports versions of openssl and how
to coordinate between them.  I recommended an openssl_base port so that
security vulnerabilities (not necessarily protocol weaknesses) could be
more easily remediated (than installworld) and so 'pkg audit' could
report on those.  It was asserted and reasserted that this would be
infeasible, however, no example or reason was given.  Considering the
time to write and test patches is the same in either case it is still an
open question.

The problem of multiple versions of the same libraries and binaries,
however, remains a weakness in the FreeBSD security model.  This may be
one of the reasons why the EU recently recommended more widespread
adoption of OpenBSD (vs FreeBSD).  Either way, it is a design flaw that
can and should be solved in the most robust way possible.

Roger



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?>