From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 10 18:41:07 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6E1D16A4CE for ; Wed, 10 Dec 2003 18:41:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [63.229.157.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C46A43D13 for ; Wed, 10 Dec 2003 18:41:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from runaround.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp1000.lariat.org@lariat.org [63.229.157.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA24503; Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:40:53 -0700 (MST) X-message-flag: Warning! Use of Microsoft Outlook renders your system susceptible to Internet worms. Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20031210193940.04f82c20@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.0.22 Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:40:50 -0700 To: Michael Sierchio From: Brett Glass In-Reply-To: <3FD7C240.4030005@tenebras.com> References: <6.0.0.22.2.20031210115335.04c2fc50@localhost> <20031210093927.70c87960.amonk@gnutec.com> <6.0.0.22.2.20031210124332.04e94ac0@localhost> <16343.33321.632599.190251@oscar.buszard-welcher.com> <6.0.0.22.2.20031210173916.04f57be8@localhost> <3FD7C240.4030005@tenebras.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" cc: Kyle Amon cc: security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: s/key authentication for Apache on FreeBSD? X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Security issues [members-only posting] List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 02:41:07 -0000 An excellent reason to use SSL together with S/key. --Brett At 06:02 PM 12/10/2003, Michael Sierchio wrote: >The problem with S/key or OPIE authentication is that it >is sadly subject to a MITM attack, and relies on >blind trust in the server. > >The challenge is not a random challenge, it is unfortunately >a sequence number and salt -- if I trick you into typing in >the one-time password with a lower sequence number than the >current one you are proper fucked. I can then generate all of >the subsequent "one-time" passwords. > >If you have a half-authenticated SSL connection, and are >conducting the exchange over it, then it should be fine.