<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>TLS &#8211; Phocean.net</title>
	<atom:link href="/tag/tls/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>/</link>
	<description>Computer Security Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2017 21:17:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.10</generator>
	<item>
		<title>CVE-2009-3555: Safari, fix reached Mountain Lion&#8230;</title>
		<link>/2012/08/13/cve-2009-3555-safari-fix-reached-mountain-lion.html</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2012 17:53:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[phocean]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Mac OS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[System]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CVE-2009-3555]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Safari]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SSL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TLS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.phocean.net/?p=1348</guid>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.phocean.net/?p=1348</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I haven&#8217;t investigated much (and I will not more), but since my upgrade to Mac OS 10.8 (Mountain Lion), Safari supports safe renegociation. Meanwhile, I had received a laconic answer from Apple to my bug report saying that they &#8220;are aware of this issue&#8221;. Note that Safari 6.0 on Lion did not (at least on my...<br><i class="icon-right-hand"></i> <span class="read-more"><a href="/2012/08/13/cve-2009-3555-safari-fix-reached-mountain-lion.html">Continue Reading</a></span>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I haven&#8217;t investigated much (and I will not more), but since my upgrade to Mac OS 10.8 (Mountain Lion), Safari supports safe renegociation.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, I had received a laconic answer from Apple to my bug report saying that they &#8220;are aware of this issue&#8221;.</p>
<p>Note that Safari 6.0 on Lion <a href="/2012/06/10/cve-2009-3555-safari-not-yet-patched.html">did not</a> (at least on my computer, if someone could confirm)&#8230; so same browser version, different OS, the system SSL library must have been &#8211; silently &#8211; updated.</p>
<p>Anyway, good move finally.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>CVE-2009-3555: Safari not yet patched ???</title>
		<link>/2012/06/10/cve-2009-3555-safari-not-yet-patched.html</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Jun 2012 18:17:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[phocean]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Mac OS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vulnerabilities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[browser]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chrome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CVE-2009-3555]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[firefox]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opera]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Safari]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SSL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TLS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.phocean.net/?p=1249</guid>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.phocean.net/?p=1249</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The other day I was shocked to find this entry in my Apache logs: [error] SSL Library Error: 336068931 error:14080143:SSL routines:SSL3_ACCEPT:unsafe legacy renegotiation disabled It occurs appears when I try to use a SSL client certificate with Safari. Of course, authentication is broken as it just fails on an 403 error page. So it seems...<br><i class="icon-right-hand"></i> <span class="read-more"><a href="/2012/06/10/cve-2009-3555-safari-not-yet-patched.html">Continue Reading</a></span>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The other day I was shocked to find this entry in my Apache logs:</p>
<pre>[error] SSL Library Error: 336068931 error:14080143:SSL routines:SSL3_ACCEPT:unsafe legacy renegotiation disabled</pre>
<p>It occurs appears when I try to use a SSL client certificate with Safari. Of course, authentication is broken as it just fails on an 403 error page.</p>
<p>So it seems that Safari is the last browser which was not patched against <a href="/2009/11/28/openssl-cve-2009-3555-security-fix-and-mod_ssl-client-authentication-breakage.html">CVE-2009-3555</a> !</p>
<p>2009 !! At least, I quickly checked the other browsers I had around and they were fine: IE, Firefox, Chrome&#8230; I am having an issue with Opera also, but although I have not identified the problem yet, it seems unrelated (and does not throw the same error).</p>
<p>Note that I reported the issue to Apple, but I did not receive any answer. Silence on the wire.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>SSL/TLS RFC updated against CVE-2009-3555</title>
		<link>/2010/01/09/ssltls-rfc-updated-against-cve-2009-3555.html</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jan 2010 11:23:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[phocean]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cryptography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Linux]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[System]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Apache]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IETF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mod-ssl]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RFC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SSL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TLS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.phocean.net/?p=673</guid>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.phocean.net/?p=673</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A solution has been finally brought up to fix CVE-2009-3555 and the temporary solution that broke client authentication. At least, the IETF agreed on a fix as Marsh Ray informs us, though it will still take some weeks for the whole validation process to complete. Moreover, as it requires both the servers and the clients...<br><i class="icon-right-hand"></i> <span class="read-more"><a href="/2010/01/09/ssltls-rfc-updated-against-cve-2009-3555.html">Continue Reading</a></span>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A solution has been finally brought up to fix<a href="/2009/11/28/openssl-cve-2009-3555-security-fix-and-mod_ssl-client-authentication-breakage.html"> CVE-2009-3555 and the temporary solution that broke client authentication</a>.</p>
<p>At least, the IETF agreed on a fix as <a title="SSL/TLS fix" href="http://extendedsubset.com/?p=14" target="_blank">Marsh Ray</a> informs us, though it will still take some weeks for the whole validation process to complete.</p>
<p>Moreover, as it requires both the servers and the clients to be patched, it will take months before the patches can be applied and one can have a working client authentification architecture. The longest will be the client side, of course, so I feel sorry for those who have a large park to manage.</p>
<p>As far as I am concerned, fortunately, I will just have a few browsers that I manage directly to update. Anyway, still more patience is needed !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Postfix : TLS not working outside my network</title>
		<link>/2008/06/11/postfix-tls-not-working-outside-my-network.html</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2008 23:37:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[phocean]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cisco]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Firewall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pix]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Postfix]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SMTP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TLS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.phocean.net/?p=110</guid>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.phocean.net/?p=110</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As I just finished setting TLS and SASL to secure the access to my Postfix server, I realized that it was working only from inside my network. What I got from my lan : $ telnet mars 25 Trying 192.168.222.10... Connected to phocean.net. Escape character is '^]'. 220 phocean.net ESMTP Postfix (Debian/GNU) ehlo phocean.net 250-phocean.net...<br><i class="icon-right-hand"></i> <span class="read-more"><a href="/2008/06/11/postfix-tls-not-working-outside-my-network.html">Continue Reading</a></span>]]></description>
		<description><![CDATA[As I just finished setting TLS and SASL to secure the access to my Postfix server, I realized that it was working only from inside my network. What I got from my lan : $ telnet mars 25 Trying 192.168.222.10... Connected to phocean.net. Escape character is '^]'. 220 phocean.net ESMTP Postfix (Debian/GNU) ehlo phocean.net 250-phocean.net...<br><i class="icon-right-hand"></i> <span class="read-more"><a href="/2008/06/11/postfix-tls-not-working-outside-my-network.html">Continue Reading</a></span>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As I just finished setting TLS and SASL to secure the access to my Postfix server, I realized that it was working only from inside my network.</p>
<p>What I got from my lan :</p>
<pre>$ telnet mars 25
Trying 192.168.222.10...
Connected to phocean.net.
Connected to phocean.net.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 phocean.net ESMTP Postfix (Debian/GNU)
220 phocean.net ESMTP Postfix (Debian/GNU)
ehlo phocean.net
ehlo phocean.net
250-phocean.net
250-phocean.net
250-PIPELINING
250-SIZE 200000000
250-VRFY
250-ETRN
250-STARTTLS
250-AUTH NTLM DIGEST-MD5 CRAM-MD5
250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
250-8BITMIME
250 DSN</pre>
<p>I shows well that the TLS handshake is initiated.</p>
<p>But from this outside, I just got this weired thing :</p>
<pre>$ telnet phocean.net 25
<pre>$ telnet phocean.net 25
Trying 81.64.194.119...
Connected to phocean.net.
Connected to phocean.net.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 **********************************************
ehlo phocean.net
ehlo phocean.net
502 5.5.2 Error: command not recognized</pre>
<p>Of course, the firewall, a Cisco Pix one, was properly set to redirect port 25 UDP/TCP to my server.</p>
<p>However, I soon focused my effort on this equipment. I considered a while that the cause could be some filtering from my provider, but most probably, the problem came from the Pix.</p>
<p>That was not difficult to figure out : it had some protocol inspector activated for SMTP :</p>
<pre>$ sh ru
[...]
fixup protocol smtp 25
[...]</pre>
<p>Just after :</p>
<pre>&gt; no fixup protocol smtp 25</pre>
<p>&#8230; it started to work perfectly well !!!</p>
<p>The engine for the SMTP protocol could not recognize the TLS handshake, considered that the SMTP session as not valid and therefore blocked it !</p>
<p>I can deactivate it without any fear as my Postfix server is already pretty well secured, or at least configured to reject any weired SMTP dialog.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
