From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jun 26 00:53:29 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B62C106564A
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 26 Jun 2012 00:53:29 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com)
Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com (mail-wi0-f178.google.com
	[209.85.212.178])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 210018FC08
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 26 Jun 2012 00:53:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wibhr14 with SMTP id hr14so1369168wib.13
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:53:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=googlemail.com; s=20120113;
	h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer
	:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
	bh=kWqNLf4aTWSOhzmtA+h5rRXdIR4y34lCmlVLXWc3KnQ=;
	b=kdZ8Ca4fQcZ/UhC5cmmT9rsMWxrXQNcHVuYWTS9zjkEpyfo0dRD9Jql5YxsJh6sbnI
	+dOw6VT+Bm1RMSyifpP5WFuvw7A9FxjnqjYr+aaYeZgBGzmNtjI+0T+HEyT+UeQugKKM
	i4b5V60/ZACpMCF2+2MGtiejZwZtFYmYxMh6N3z7ItSKIxZWdJDJsZThSMZIn7QMD0SN
	cSQYHICywZnYPbotAfNQMlR4rBl6Sf+Ot40H38GbIMAJujas7/4MJePE1wRGEWoE1s6z
	GTPp2YGf9OAjefJk2fQkmVQV7/tqIbEmhsVIvGgsQpGSP/3i+Nre2kj9tXwLSRMBcoCN
	sbXA==
Received: by 10.180.97.165 with SMTP id eb5mr3189929wib.0.1340672008148;
	Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:53:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gumby.homeunix.com (87-194-105-247.bethere.co.uk.
	[87.194.105.247])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id fm1sm1122718wib.10.2012.06.25.17.53.26
	(version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:53:27 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 01:53:23 +0100
From: RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com>
To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20120626015323.02b7f348@gumby.homeunix.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FE8F814.5020906@FreeBSD.org>
References: <CA+QLa9A4gdgPEn3YBpExTG05e4mqbgxr2kJ16BQ27OSozVmmwQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<86zk7sxvc3.fsf@ds4.des.no>
	<CA+QLa9Dyu96AxmCNLcU8n5R21aTH6dStDT004iA516EH=jTkvQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120625023104.2a0c7627@gumby.homeunix.com>
	<86pq8nxtjp.fsf@ds4.des.no>
	<20120625223807.4dbeb91d@gumby.homeunix.com>
	<4FE8DF29.50406@FreeBSD.org>
	<20120625235310.3eed966e@gumby.homeunix.com>
	<4FE8F814.5020906@FreeBSD.org>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.6; amd64-portbld-freebsd8.3)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Hardware potential to duplicate existing host keys... RSA DSA
 ECDSA was Add rc.conf variables...
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
	<freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 00:53:29 -0000

On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 16:45:24 -0700
Doug Barton wrote:

> On 06/25/2012 15:53, RW wrote:
> > On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:59:05 -0700
> > Doug Barton wrote:
> > 
> >>>> Having a copy of the host key allows you to do one thing and one
> >>>> thing only: impersonate the server.  It does not allow you to
> >>>> eavesdrop on an already-established connection.
> >>>
> >>> It enables you to eavesdrop on new connections,
> >>
> >> Can you describe the mechanism used to do this? 
> > 
> > Through a MITM attack if nothing else
> 
> Sorry, I wasn't clear. Please describe, in precise, reproducible
> terms, how one would accomplish this. Or, link to known script-kiddie
> resources ... whatever. My point being, I'm pretty confident that
> what you're asserting isn't true. But if I'm wrong, I'd like to learn
> why.

Servers don't always require client keys for authentication. If they
don't then a MITM attack only needs the server's key.