Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The bar mitzvah attack is an attack on the SSL/TLS protocols that exploits the use of the RC4 cipher with weak keys for that cipher. [1] [2] While this affects only the first hundred or so bytes of only the very small fraction of connections that happen to use weak keys, it allows significant compromise of user security, for example by allowing the interception of password information [2 ...
SSL 2.0 (insecure) SSL 3.0 (insecure) TLS 1.0 (deprecated) TLS 1.1 (deprecated) TLS 1.2 TLS 1.3 EV certificate SHA-2 certificate ECDSA certificate BEAST CRIME POODLE (SSLv3) RC4 FREAK Logjam Protocol selection by user Microsoft Internet Explorer (1–10) [n 20] Windows Schannel: 1.x: Windows 3.1, 95, NT, [n 21] [n 22] Mac OS 7, 8: No SSL/TLS ...
The DROWN (Decrypting RSA with Obsolete and Weakened eNcryption) attack is a cross-protocol security bug that attacks servers supporting modern SSLv3/TLS protocol suites by using their support for the obsolete, insecure, SSL v2 protocol to leverage an attack on connections using up-to-date protocols that would otherwise be secure.
The SSL certificate allowed the application to decrypt outgoing traffic to analyse it. [19] Once the new SSL certificate was installed, the application alerted Equifax employees to suspicious network activity. The certificate had been expired for nine months. [20] By July 30, Equifax had shut down the exploit. [14]
Certificate revocation is "an important tool" for dealing with attacks and accidental compromises. RFC 9325 places a normative requirement on TLS implementations to have some means of distrusting certificates. [9] Without revocation, an attacker can use a compromised certificate to impersonate its owner until expiry. [4]
Certificates that support certificate transparency must include one or more signed certificate timestamps (SCTs), which is a promise from a log operator to include the certificate in their log within a maximum merge delay (MMD). [4] [3] At some point within the maximum merge delay, the log operator adds the certificate to their log.
It expands on static certificate pinning, which hardcodes public key hashes of well-known websites or services within web browsers and applications. [5] Most browsers disable pinning for certificate chains with private root certificates to enable various corporate content inspection scanners [6] and web debugging tools (such as mitmproxy or ...
A workaround for SSL 3.0 and TLS 1.0, roughly equivalent to random IVs from TLS 1.1, was widely adopted by many implementations in late 2011. [30] In 2014, the POODLE vulnerability of SSL 3.0 was discovered, which takes advantage of the known vulnerabilities in CBC, and an insecure fallback negotiation used in browsers. [31]