Slashdot Mirror
A Third of All HTTPS Websites Vulnerable To DROWN Attack (drownattack.com)
An anonymous reader writes: The OpenSSL project has released versions 1.0.2g and 1.0.1s to address a high severity security issue known as the DROWN attack (CVE-2016-0800) which allows attackers to break HTTPS and steal encrypted information. In layman terms, the attack uses an improperly patched issue (from 1998) in SSL to attack websites using the more modern TLS protocol. Servers where admins use SSL and TLS are in danger. Additionally, servers where only TLS is used, but the admins are sharing the same certificate for other servers where they have SSL, are also vulnerable, since the attack targets RSA, employed in both SSL and TLS. The entire attack is also easy to carry out, costing only $440 on Amazon EC2.
The name "DROWN" probably has something to do with how admins feel about using OpenSSL by now (or perhaps what they think should be done to it, or both). It goes well with names like heart-bleed.
So I take it this is an issue which hasn't been properly fixed by vendors and nobody is using web servers from 1998?
This sounds more like badly written software than bad admin practices. How the heck are you supposed to prevent that?
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
So glad that I'm using a webserver that does NOT use this abomination called OpenSSL and was writting with security in mind. Drown, Heartbleed, Slowloris, etc, never caused me any trouble.
It doesn't have to be like this. All we need to do is make sure we keep talking.
It seems to say that if you have SSLv2 enabled on any service with your keys, you're vulnerable. Otherwise, not. A quarter of admins don't seem to know how to disable it.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
[REDUNDANT]
Good thing /. isn't vulnerable at all, thanks to its lack of HTTPS support!
Obviously because it doesn't support SSLv2.
The problem is not in the library but in the protocol, the reason people continue to use OpenSSL is BECAUSE it supports all sorts of SSL versions and thus more flexible to use than any other OpenSSL-wannabe-dropin.
This OpenSSL version however breaks stuff by disabling it by default and changing the API when you DO want to use it; given that the only applications that would use it are ancient, I doubt there would be any fixes for those applications to use the new API. This is a protocol issue, not a library issue, leave the API's intact, throw up a giant warning and let people manage their own security. Now what will happen is that people requiring SSLv2 support (for whatever reason) will probably revert to older versions of the library that have bigger issues than SSLv2 support.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Absolutely astonished that anyone has SSL v2 enabled. You can pick any modern security standard (like PCI DSS or SSAE16) and it reads something like, "disable all obsolete or vulnerable protocols". I mean, I haven't had SSL v3 enabled on anything I'm responsible for since 2010.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
This flaw, which is common to all SSLv2 implementations, was discovered and proven with help from the OpenSSL team. So tell me how horrible OpenSSL is again?
Incidentally, none of my servers (many of which use OpenSSL) were vulnerable to DROWN because SSLv2 has been turned off on all of them for years.
There's nothing wrong with applauding your own favorite webserver, but when you attack a mature crypto library, you need to get your facts straight. Personally I am less likely to consider Hiawatha if it's beloved by ignorant people....
It's a stupid thing to quote- I am sure Amazon or any other hosting provider keeps very good logs about user activity and would quickly hand your information over to feds if asked. So it really isn't that cheap- either you need to steal access to such machines or buy them.
love is just extroverted narcissism
Ha ha, no worries here, I don't use SSL on my sites!
Oh, wait...
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...