On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Jeffrey Walton <noloa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 11:11 PM, Noon Silk <noonsli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> From:
>> http://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2012/06/bad-couple-of-years-for-cryptographic.html
>>
>> "Here's the postage stamp version: due to a perfect storm of (subtle,
>> but not novel) cryptographic flaws, an attacker can extract sensitive
>> keys from several popular cryptographic token devices. This is
>> obviously not good, and it may have big implications for people who
>> depend on tokens for their day-to-day security. [...] The more
>> specific (and important) lesson for cryptographic implementers is: if
>> you're using PKCS#1v1.5 padding for RSA encryption, cut it out.
>> Really. This is the last warning you're going to get."
>>
>> Direct link to the paper:
>> http://hal.inria.fr/docs/00/70/47/90/PDF/RR-7944.pdf - Efficient
>> Padding Oracle Attacks on Cryptographic Hardware by Bardou, Focardi,
>> Kawamoto, Simionato, Steel and Tsay
> Thanks for the link, Noon.
>
> So I'm clear here: this applies to RSA Encryption. Are RSA Signatures
> still safe when using PKCS v1.5 padding?
Cancel. I got to one of my text books to look up RSA Signatures.
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
