[jdev] Re: TLS and self-signed certs

2004-11-18 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Neil Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Thursday 18 November 2004 10:07 am, David Waite wrote: > > Nothing can be done without trust. We are using Verisign today as a > > trusted body for providing correct D

[jdev] Re: TLS and self-signed certs

2004-11-18 Thread Neil Stevens
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 18 November 2004 10:07 am, David Waite wrote: > Nothing can be done without trust. We are using Verisign today as a > trusted body for providing correct DNS records and references. Funny business in DNS is easy to detect. Funny business i

[jdev] Re: TLS and self-signed certs

2004-11-18 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jacek Konieczny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 09:33:05AM -0800, JD Conley wrote: > > If an attacker attempts to connect and provides a certificate that is > > not on record for the host they are claiming to be, a dialback is > > performed aga

[jdev] Re: TLS and self-signed certs

2004-11-18 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Waite <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > One man's trusted body is another man's corruptable agency. > Nothing can be done without trust. We are using Verisign today as a > trusted body for providing correct DNS records and references. Shyeah, speaking of corru

Re: [jdev] Re: TLS and self-signed certs

2004-11-18 Thread David Waite
Nothing can be done without trust. We are using Verisign today as a trusted body for providing correct DNS records and references. -David Waite On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 05:14:02 -0800, Neil Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Thursday 18 Novembe

Re: [jdev] Re: TLS and self-signed certs

2004-11-18 Thread Jacek Konieczny
On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 09:33:05AM -0800, JD Conley wrote: > If an attacker attempts to connect and provides a certificate that is > not on record for the host they are claiming to be, a dialback is > performed against the authority of the host. The attacker, unless they > have control of DNS or t

RE: [jdev] Re: TLS and self-signed certs

2004-11-18 Thread JD Conley
> -Original Message- > From: Matthias Wimmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Hi JD! > > JD Conley schrieb am 2004-11-12 09:18:46: > > > Not sure ... there are valid reasons to change your s2s certificate: > > > > > > - Key expired > > > - Key has been compromised > > > - Key has been lost >

[jdev] Re: TLS and self-signed certs

2004-11-18 Thread Neil Stevens
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday 18 November 2004 04:38 am, Matthias Wimmer wrote: > Having a trusted body like the JSF, that acts as a registry/CA might be > a solution and I am looking forward to see Peter's proposal ... the > remaining problem might be to verify if some

Re: [jdev] Re: TLS and self-signed certs

2004-11-18 Thread Matthias Wimmer
Hi JD! JD Conley schrieb am 2004-11-12 09:18:46: > > Not sure ... there are valid reasons to change your s2s certificate: > > > > - Key expired > > - Key has been compromised > > - Key has been lost > > > > Well, if the cert changed you could then "verify" the key again with a > dialback and re