Slashdot Mirror


Why Google Is Pushing For a Web Free of SHA-1

An anonymous reader writes: Google recently announced Chrome will be gradually phasing out support for certificates using SHA-1 encryption. They said, "We need to ensure that by the time an attack against SHA-1 is demonstrated publicly, the web has already moved away from it." Developer Eric Mill has written up a post explaining why SHA-1 is dangerously weak, and why moving browsers away from acceptance of SHA-1 is a lengthy, but important process. Both Microsoft and Mozilla have deprecation plans in place, but Google's taking the additional step of showing the user that it's not secure. "This is a gutsy move by Google, and represents substantial risk. One major reason why it's been so hard for browsers to move away from signature algorithms is that when browsers tell a user an important site is broken, the user believes the browser is broken and switches browsers. Google seems to be betting that Chrome is trusted enough for its security and liked enough by its users that they can withstand the first mover disadvantage. Opera has also backed Google's plan. The Safari team is watching developments and hasn't announced anything."

4 of 108 comments (clear)

  1. Deprecation shouldn't start at the browser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It should start at the certificate authorities. They should've been planning for sha-1 to be unsupported by x date, and not issuing certificates valid past that date.

    1. Re:Deprecation shouldn't start at the browser by nleven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My understanding is CAs have limited interest in this matter. The product they are selling to website owners is really that green lock in the address bar. As long as that green lock icon is there, SHA1 or SHA256 won't make any difference. In this sense, deprecation should actually start at the browser.

  2. SHA-3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wouldn't now be the time to push toward a transition to SHA-3, rather than SHA-2? I realize SHA-2 implementations are much more common. But 1) SHA-2 was handed down from the NSA and 2) is in the same family as MD5 and SHA-1.

    Considering 1) the recent NSA scandals, 2) that SHA-3 was independently developed and won a public competition, and 2) that SHA-3 uses a newer family of one-hash algorithms which is provably more secure than SHA-2, it would seem prudent to use momentum to move to SHA-3 sooner rather than later.

  3. Re: People who just bought a multiyear certificate by corychristison · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not sure if serious...

    Most CA's offer free re-issues these days. Allowing you to change your key, and hashing algorithm, and possibly other stuff.