Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Heartbleed fix - question re: replacing self-signed certs with real ones
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 06:11:23
Message-Id: 201404170710.57224.michaelkintzios@gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Heartbleed fix - question re: replacing self-signed certs with real ones by Tanstaafl
1 On Wednesday 16 Apr 2014 18:56:57 Tanstaafl wrote:
2 > On 4/16/2014 7:14 AM, Matti Nykyri <matti.nykyri@×××.fi> wrote:
3 > > On Apr 16, 2014, at 13:52, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@×××××××××××.org> wrote:
4 > >> Or will simply replacing my self-signed certs with the new real ones be
5 > >> good enough?
6 > >
7 > > No it will not. Keys are te ones that have been compromised. You need
8 > > to create new keys. With those keys you need to create certificate
9 > > request. Then you send that request to certificate authority for
10 > > signing and publishing in their crl. When you receive the signed
11 > > certificate you can start using it with your key. Never send your key
12 > > to CA or expect to get a key from them.
13 >
14 > Ok, thanks...
15 >
16 > But... if I do this (create a new key-pair and CR), will this
17 > immediately invalidate my old ones (ie, will my current production
18 > server stop working until I get the new certs installed)?
19
20 You have not explained your PKI set up. Creating a new private key and CSR is
21 just another private key and CSR.
22
23 If you replace either the private CA key on the server, or any of its
24 certificates chain, but leave the path in your vhosts pointing to the old
25 key/certificate that no longer exist you will of course break the server.
26 Apache will refuse to restart and warn you about borked paths.
27
28
29 > I'm guessing not (or else there would be a lot of downtime for lots of
30 > sites involved) - but I've only ever done this once (created the
31 > key-pair, CR and self-signed keys) a long time ago, so want to make sure
32 > I don't shoot myself in the foot...
33
34 Yes, better be safe with production machines. However, don't take too long
35 because your private key(s) are potentially already compromised.
36
37
38 > I have created new self-=signed certs a couple of times since creating
39 > the original key-pair+CR, but never created a new key-pair/CR...
40 >
41 > > There are also other algorithms the RSA. And also if you wan't to get
42 > > PFS you will need to consider your setup, certificate and security
43 > > model.
44 >
45 > What is PFS?
46
47 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_secrecy
48
49 I'm no mathematical genius to understand cryptography at anything more than a
50 superficial level, but I thought that ECDS, that PFS for TLS depends on, was
51 compromised from inception by the NSA? Perhaps only some ECDS were, I am not
52 really sure.
53
54 I remember reading somewhere (was it Schneier?) that RSA is probably a better
55 bet these days. I'd also appreciate some views from the better informed
56 members of the list because there's a lot of FUD and tin hats flying around in
57 the post Snowden era.
58
59 --
60 Regards,
61 Mick

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies