[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Network security manager

From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen
Subject: Re: Network security manager
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 15:35:35 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.130012 (Ma Gnus v0.12) Emacs/24.4.51 (gnu/linux)

Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <address@hidden> writes:

> Once the fingerprint is stored, though, it fails in weird ways. I tried
> manually modifying the fingerprint in the network-security.data file (to
> make verification fail). This elicits this behaviour:
> - On security levels high and paranoid, verification just fails silently
>   (open-network-stream returns nil), with no option to update the stored
>   fingerprint.

I edited a fingerprint, set the level to `high', and then reconnected.
It notified me that it had changed, and then returned the process.  So I
seem to be unable to reproduce this.

This is my test case:

(setq process
       "nntpd" (get-buffer-create "*nntp*") "google.com" "https"
       :type 'tls))

> - On security levels low and medium, verification *succeeds*, even
>   though a fingerprint is stored that does not match the certificate.
> I would consider especially the second point to be a big no-no; even if
> the security level is subsequently lowered, having a stored fingerprint
> should take precedence and fail the verification. Maybe the "continue
> anyway" could cause the stored fingerprint to be removed, but just
> continuing regardless is bad IMO.

No I think that's the correct behaviour.  If you want `medium' security,
you only care about whether the certificate is valid or not.  And the
google.com certificate is valid, even though it changed.

(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]