| 1 |
Am 24.02.2012 04:01, schrieb Adam Carter: |
| 2 |
>>> In all of those cases above, if you allowed the connection it would |
| 3 |
>>> still be SSL encrypted. You'd be protected against packet sniffers but |
| 4 |
>>> not against man-in-the-middle attack. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> And the reason someone will man-in-the-middle you, is so they can |
| 7 |
> sniff your traffic and get passwords or other sensitive information. |
| 8 |
> This is done by terminating the SSL session from you, and then |
| 9 |
> creating a new SSL session to the real server. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
>>> By switching to http your |
| 12 |
>>> session occurs in plain-text and is vulnerable to both attacks. |
| 13 |
>>> |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> OK, clearly I'm overstating the problem then. I haven't ever had any |
| 16 |
>> problems logging into password protected, little closed lock in the |
| 17 |
>> bottom corner web sites so that's not a problem. The real problem I've |
| 18 |
>> noticed the most is just with these links that arrive as https:// type |
| 19 |
>> links and Firefox asking me to specifically accept these certificates |
| 20 |
>> which I don't really want to do. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Is the problem that accepting the certificate is inconvenient? |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
>> And I've not had any problems I've noticed by just removing the 's' |
| 25 |
>> and using the site like a regular site. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> That's ok if you understand that you're turning off the security |
| 28 |
> features, so it will be possible for an attacker to see your traffic. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
>> So, I guess there really isn't any problem with my system. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> Correct - the problem is on the server that you're connecting to is |
| 33 |
> presenting an untrusted certificate. That could be because its a |
| 34 |
> server that's impersonating the server you really want to connect to, |
| 35 |
> or the server's administrator is not doing their job. In rare cases it |
| 36 |
> could also be that the certificate has been revoked or the CA is no |
| 37 |
> longer trusted by your web browser (eg the Diginotar mentioned |
| 38 |
> earlier). |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Let's not forget that whenever you are presented with that warning, it |
| 42 |
could also be a man-in-the-middle attack. Therefore just clicking on |
| 43 |
"Accept" on every site is about the stupidest thing you can do. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
I'm unsure how the warning looks when you have previously accepted a |
| 46 |
normally untrusted certificate on that site and now it is different |
| 47 |
(which could be an indication of MITM). I hope there is a big red flashy |
| 48 |
warning but I doubt it. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Regards, |
| 51 |
Florian Philipp |
Archives