<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166 in All Things Unix</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20475861</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:02:35 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:02:35 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20491998</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/902719"><b>evilghost</b></A> : I walked in this morning and had this printout on my cube wall.  Awesome.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20491998</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 09:40:26 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20491855</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/520919"><b>No_Strings</b></A> : "Ubuntu - Turns out distro is actually just Windows Vista wth a few custom themes."<br><br>Something some of us have suspected for a long time.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20491855</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 09:08:47 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20491453</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/0"><b>anon</b></A> : I hope the following doesn't lower the otherwise highly admirable tone of this thread too excessively:<br><br>&raquo;<A HREF="http://xkcd.com/424/" >xkcd.com/424/</A><br><br>:)]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20491453</guid>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 06:33:27 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20484395</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/902719"><b>evilghost</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  BeesTea <A HREF="/useremail/u/782124"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>SSH scanning is increased considerably across the Internet.  <br><br><A HREF="http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11518?ref=rss">http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11518?ref=rss</a><br><br>It's important to consider that simply having ssh-key auth enabled is not enough to be compromised.  A user would still need to be using a vulnerable key for authentication.  In practical experience,  public-key is way less common than simple password auth with ssh.  This means the more likely attack vector will be session keys.  Considering that password auth for ssh is plain taxt pushed through the session tunnel, I'd be more worried about that.  Someone sniffing TCP/22 and cracking it at their leisure would result in essentially plain text logins and passwords.<br><br>EDIT: Typo<br> </div>One thing to consider would be password-less keypairs, for example, I use these at home on my trusted computers for sshfs to avoid password prompts.  It's my understanding that if someone knew the compromised keypair and username they could successfully authenticate without password. ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20484395</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 May 2008 22:28:39 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20483888</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/782124"><b>BeesTea</b></A> : SSH scanning is increased considerably across the Internet.  <br><br><A HREF="http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11518?ref=rss">http://www.securityfocus.com/news/11518?ref=rss</a><br><br>It's important to consider that simply having ssh-key auth enabled is not enough to be compromised.  A user would still need to be using a vulnerable key for authentication.  In practical experience,  public-key is way less common than simple password auth with ssh.  This means the more likely attack vector will be session keys.  Considering that password auth for ssh is plain taxt pushed through the session tunnel, I'd be more worried about that.  Someone sniffing TCP/22 and cracking it at their leisure would result in essentially plain text logins and passwords.<br><br>EDIT: Typo]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20483888</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 May 2008 21:05:54 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20483856</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/465839"><b>deblin</b></A> : Nevermind, standard log messages from the brute force attackers, not necessarily anything significant to this.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20483856</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 May 2008 21:00:24 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20482838</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/782124"><b>BeesTea</b></A> : H D Moore, of the Metasploit project etc, has made the following write up.<br><br><A HREF="http://metasploit.com/users/hdm/tools/debian-openssl/">http://metasploit.com/users/hdm/tools/debian-openssl/</a><br><br>Of note is the FAQ<br><br> <blockquote><small>quote:</small><hr>Frequently Asked Questions<br>Q: How long did it take to generate these keys?<br>A: About two hours for the 1024-bit DSA and 2048-bit RSA keys for x86. I used 31 Xeon cores clocked at 2.33Ghz. I am generating the RSA 4096-bit keys now and the total time should be about 18 hours.<br><br>Q: Will you share your code for distributing the key-generation across mulitple processors?<br>A: Nope. The code is hardcoded for this specific cluster and is too poorly-written to be worth cleaning up.<br><br>Q: How long does it take a crack a SSH user account using these keys?<br>A: This depends on the speed of the network and the configuration of the SSH server. It should be possible to try all 32,767 keys of both DSA-1024 and RSA-2048 within a couple hours, but be careful of anti-brute-force scripts on the target server.<br><br>Q: I use 16384-bit RSA keys, can these be broken?<br>A: Yes, its just a matter of time and processing power. For mere mortals, 4096-bit keys are already a little on the paranoid side. All possible 4096-bit keys should be available within the next day or so. It is possible to generate all combinations of 8192-bit and 16384-bit keys, but I probably have better uses for my processors :-)<br><hr></blockquote><br><br>Scary.<br><br>Folks,  if you're not already, pay close attention to excessive connections to your crypto services like ssh, vpn, etc.  ~32,000 attempts can go by fast. <br><small>--<br>Overpower, overcome.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20482838</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 May 2008 17:49:06 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20481839</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/782124"><b>BeesTea</b></A> : That wiki entry is excellent.  I'd recommend everyone read it, specifically the list of likely affected software.<br><br>Thanks for sharing!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20481839</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 May 2008 14:47:55 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20481788</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/902719"><b>evilghost</b></A> : Good info here:<br><br>&raquo;<A HREF="http://wiki.debian.org/SSLkeys" >wiki.debian.org/SSLkeys</A>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20481788</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 May 2008 14:38:30 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20478228</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/902719"><b>evilghost</b></A> : I'm reminded why I don't like Ubuntu when the openssh-server and openssh-client packages are held back requiring the installation of openssh-blacklist as a requirement.<br><br>Dear Ubuntu Team, I'm not going to use ssh-vulnkey to see if my system is vulnerable, I'm reissuing keys.  Why is this package a <b>requirement</b> for the openssh-server package?  Cut me a freaking break.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20478228</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 21:40:05 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20478204</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/902719"><b>evilghost</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  Eatmeingreek <A HREF="/useremail/u/421006"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>Script seems to work.  At least it identifies weak keys and they go away when you run  evilghost <A HREF="/useremail/u/902719"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>'s commands.<br><br>Speaking of  evilghost <A HREF="/useremail/u/902719"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>,  the first line, "ssh-keygen -q -f /etc/ssh/ssh_host_key -N '' -t rsa1" creates files called "ssh_host_key" and "ssh_host_key.pub" that didn't already exist on all the Debian boxes I've tried so far.  Don't think they're really needed.<br><br>Fortunately a lot of my Debian hosts started life as Sarge boxes so a lot have been unaffected so far.<br> </div>Agree, rsa1 not needed, at least on this end.  Edited my post, thanks for pointing this out.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20478204</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 21:34:54 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20477776</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/782124"><b>BeesTea</b></A> : Excellent feedback.  Thanks!<br><small>--<br>Overpower, overcome.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20477776</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 20:20:59 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20477510</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/162762"><b>djrobx</b></A> : Script appears to work.  Tried it against a Sarge-generated host keys and it was quiet.   Tried it against a recently installed Etch server and it reported the weak keys.  After upgrading and regenerating the host keys, it was quiet.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20477510</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 19:33:16 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20477091</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/465839"><b>deblin</b></A> : I don't think it (by default) supports RSA1 keys, and rightly so. They're quite insecure, relative to DSA and RSA2.<br><small>--<br>&raquo;<A HREF="http://hillaryis404.org/" >hillaryis404.org/</A></small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20477091</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 18:07:50 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20476961</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/421006"><b>Eatmeingreek</b></A> : Script seems to work.  At least it identifies weak keys and they go away when you run  evilghost <A HREF="/useremail/u/902719"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>'s commands.<br><br>Speaking of  evilghost <A HREF="/useremail/u/902719"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A>,  the first line, "ssh-keygen -q -f /etc/ssh/ssh_host_key -N '' -t rsa1" creates files called "ssh_host_key" and "ssh_host_key.pub" that didn't already exist on all the Debian boxes I've tried so far.  Don't think they're really needed.<br><br>Fortunately a lot of my Debian hosts started life as Sarge boxes so a lot have been unaffected so far.<br><small>--<br><A HREF="http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Brazil_%28film%29#Taglines">"Be safe be suspicious"</a></small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20476961</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 17:43:39 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20476531</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/465839"><b>deblin</b></A> : I haven't tested it myself, but apparently this script can find affected keys:<br><br>&raquo;<A HREF="http://security.debian.org/project/extra/dowkd/dowkd.pl.gz" >security.debian.org/project/extr&middot;&middot;&middot;kd.pl.gz</A><br><br>It's a huge perl script, namely because it has the key data in the perl script itself.  :)<br><br>Hope it's useful for some folks.<br><small>--<br>&raquo;<A HREF="http://hillaryis404.org/" >hillaryis404.org/</A></small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20476531</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 16:23:10 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20476262</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/686640"><b>EUS</b></A> : Ugh, ssh, apache2, postfix, vsftp, I have some cleaning up to do.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20476262</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 15:30:24 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20476012</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/902719"><b>evilghost</b></A> : Glad I'm running 6.06 LTS so I don't have to deal with re-creating my Apache SSL cert, my Dovecot/Postfix .pem, and my SSH keys...]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20476012</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 14:46:05 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20476010</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/0"><b>anon</b></A> : Yes. You need to regenerate them, they're required for the security of the session setup.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20476010</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 14:45:06 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20475992</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/465839"><b>deblin</b></A> : That's going to make <b>SO</b> many ssh clients really, really unhappy :)<br><br>Necessary, obviously, but people are going to be seeing a lot of "man in the middle" type errors from ssh in the coming weeks.  :D<br><small>--<br>&raquo;<A HREF="http://hillaryis404.org/" >hillaryis404.org/</A></small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20475992</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 14:39:36 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20475982</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/902719"><b>evilghost</b></A> : I dissected the OpenSSH deb and this is the postinst script that runs to create the keys.  Therefor, to recreate the host keys you can:<br><br><textarea name="code" class="text" cols=50 rows=10>rm -f /etc/ssh/ssh_host_rsa_key /etc/ssh/ssh_host_key /etc/ssh/ssh_host_dsa_key&#012;ssh-keygen -q -f /etc/ssh/ssh_host_rsa_key -N '' -t rsa&#012;ssh-keygen -q -f /etc/ssh/ssh_host_dsa_key -N '' -t dsa&#012;/etc/init.d/ssh restart&#012;</textarea><!--end code block--><br>Dissected from postinst:<br><textarea name="code" class="text" cols=50 rows=10>create_key() {&#012;        msg="$1"&#012;        shift&#012;        hostkeys="$1"&#012;        shift&#012;        file="$1"&#012;        shift&#012; &#012;        if echo "$hostkeys" | grep -x "$file" &gt;/dev/null &amp;&amp; \&#012;           &#91; ! -f "$file" &#93; ; then&#012;                echo -n $msg&#012;                ssh-keygen -q -f "$file" -N '' "$@"&#012;                echo&#012;                if type restorecon &gt;/dev/null 2&gt;&amp;1; then&#012;                        restorecon "$file.pub"&#012;                fi&#012;        fi&#012;}&#012; &#012;create_keys() {&#012;        hostkeys="$(host_keys_required)"&#012; &#012;        create_key "Creating SSH1 key; this may take some time ..." \&#012;                "$hostkeys" /etc/ssh/ssh_host_key -t rsa1&#012; &#012;        create_key "Creating SSH2 RSA key; this may take some time ..." \&#012;                "$hostkeys" /etc/ssh/ssh_host_rsa_key -t rsa&#012;        create_key "Creating SSH2 DSA key; this may take some time ..." \&#012;                "$hostkeys" /etc/ssh/ssh_host_dsa_key -t dsa&#012;}&#012;</textarea><!--end code block-->]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20475982</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 14:37:31 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20475861</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1274901"><b>refused</b></A> :  <blockquote><small>quote:</small><hr>Affected keys include SSH keys, OpenVPN keys, DNSSEC keys, and key<br>material for use in X.509 certificates and session keys used in SSL/TLS<br>connections.  Keys generated with GnuPG or GNUTLS are not affected,<br>though.<hr></blockquote><br><br>if generated with 0.9.8c-1 or after, yah they should probably be regenerated with a fixed version. the security bulletin says the old stable version Sarge wasn't affected, so depends where your ssh keys came from and what version they came from. better safe than sorry though.<br><small>--<br>"Ubuntu" - an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20475861</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 14:15:08 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20475827</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/782124"><b>BeesTea</b></A> : For sure host keys would be vulnerable too.  The public/private key exchange to build an ssh session pre-auth is almost identical to the one used for auth.<br><br>It's going to be a while before all the impact of this is fully understood I think.  Thanks for pointing that out.  It might be worth brain dumping all the places where SSL might get used like that.<br><small>--<br>Overpower, overcome.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20475827</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 14:10:04 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20475772</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/902719"><b>evilghost</b></A> : Is there any reason to regenerate the host-wide keys in /etc/ssh or just those created with ssh-keygen for use in authorized_keys?<br><br><textarea name="code" class="text" cols=50 rows=10>/etc/ssh/ssh_host_dsa_key&#012;/etc/ssh/ssh_host_dsa_key.pub&#012;/etc/ssh/ssh_host_rsa_key.pub&#012;/etc/ssh/ssh_host_rsa_key&#012;</textarea><!--end code block-->]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20475772</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 14:00:12 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20474980</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/340145"><b>Steve</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  Cabal <A HREF="/useremail/u/1432955"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>I know people hate to comment their code, but maybe intentionally using uninitialized memory would be a good opportunity for that sort of thing. :D </div><A HREF="http://www.links.org/?p=327#comment-176526">Funny you should mention that</a> :-)]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20474980</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 11:37:16 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20474851</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1432955"><b>Cabal</b></A> :  <blockquote><small>quote:</small><hr>Usually it is bad to have any kind of dependency on uninitialised memory, but OpenSSL happens to include a rare case when its OK, or even a good idea: its randomness pool. Adding uninitialised memory to it can do no harm and might do some good, which is why we do it.<hr></blockquote><br>I know people hate to comment their code, but maybe intentionally using uninitialized memory would be a good opportunity for that sort of thing. :D<br><small>--<br>Interested in <A HREF="http://www.romraider.com/">open source engine management</a> for your Subaru?</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20474851</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 11:12:03 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20474685</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/465839"><b>deblin</b></A> : Thanks for the info.<br><br>Just stumbled upon <A HREF="http://www.links.org/?p=327">this</a>. Interesting point, not sure I entirely agree with it. But certainly in this case the author makes a good point.  :)<br><small>--<br>&raquo;<A HREF="http://hillaryis404.org/" >hillaryis404.org/</A></small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20474685</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 10:39:05 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20474568</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/782124"><b>BeesTea</b></A> : That's the attack as I understand it exactly.  Thanks!]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20474568</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 10:12:55 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20474503</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/340145"><b>Steve</b></A> : Actually, I think this is waffling on the use of the term "predictable", because in the random-number business it normally means that given one number produced by the RNG, one can compute, guess, or derive another number (the previous or the following number in the series).<br><br>When this is the case, it means that if I am on the system at the same time you're generating your SSH keys or SSL session, the random number <u>I</u> get will be computationally "close" to the random number <u>you</u> get,  so I might be able to figure yours out.<br><br>My ability to exploit this vaporizes rapidly with the time difference between when I get my number and you get yours increases - it requires contemporaneous access to the same RNG.<br><br><b>But in the Debian case</b>, it appears to be a much worse kind of predictable: it instead means that the RNG is pulling from a too-small pool of possible numbers, and though I might not be able to determine the next or prior number in the sequence, the pool of available numbers is small enough that I can attempt to brute-force the RNGs that produced it.<br><br>I have not studied the particular use of random numbers in SSL or SSH, but this looks yucky: if I know or suspect that your key came from a vulnerable Debian system, I can make a fair run as figuring out the key and can therefore decode your SSL session. And maybe even your SSH private key. I don't need to have access to your server to exploit it.<br><br>This really smells like bad news.<br><br><b>Edit</b> - You could understand this problem as similar to taking a good, valid random number and using only the lower 16 bits instead of whatever the normal size is (though I doubt the actual bug is implemented this way).<br><br>Steve <small>&mdash; who is <u>not</u> an expert on this area, and might be full of baloney</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20474503</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 09:57:23 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Heads Up: Debian OpenSSL RNG Vuln CVE-2008-0166</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20474302</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/782124"><b>BeesTea</b></A> : <A HREF="http://lists.debian.org/debian-security-announce/2008/msg00152.html">http://lists.debian.org/debian-security-announce/2008/msg00152.html</a><br><br>  <blockquote><small>quote:</small><hr>Luciano Bello discovered that the random number generator in Debian's<br>openssl package is predictable.  This is caused by an incorrect<br>Debian-specific change to the openssl package (CVE-2008-0166).  As a<br>result, cryptographic key material may be guessable.<br><br>This is a Debian-specific vulnerability which does not affect other<br>operating systems which are not based on Debian.  However, other systems<br>can be indirectly affected if weak keys are imported into them.<br><br>It is strongly recommended that all cryptographic key material which has<br>been generated by OpenSSL versions starting with 0.9.8c-1 on Debian<br>systems is recreated from scratch.  Furthermore, all DSA keys ever used<br>on affected Debian systems for signing or authentication purposes should<br>be considered compromised; the Digital Signature Algorithm relies on a<br>secret random value used during signature generation.<hr></blockquote><br><br>This is far reaching and potentially very bad.  Key and certificate crypto relies on a good random number being used to work properly. This vulnerability means it's possible to guess all possible keys that have been generated using the affected versions of OpenSSL. Practically, this means crypto on these systems may be completely ineffective.  Additionally,  note that any key made with the library will carry the problem forward even if the libraries underneath have been corrected.  So if you've run ssh-keygen, for example, you need to make new keys or even the updated system will still be vulnerable.<br><br>This is also going to affect Debian derived systems.<br><br>Edit: Added the bit about derivatives.<br><small>--<br>Overpower, overcome.</small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20474302</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 09:08:11 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
