4 ms·
It's not the browser sharing the hash content, but the javascript in the page. In something like this you clearly have to trust the javascript you download each
by ianopolous 10y ago
It's not the browser sharing the hash content, but the javascript in the page. In something like this you clearly have to trust the javascript you download each time in the page.
- hashtagInsecure 10y agohttps://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/05/detecting_quant.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/05/detecting_qua...
- ianopolous 10y agoIs that attack possible over https, without compromising a CA or a local hack like sslStrip? If a page is doing secret stuff over http it's even more broken.
- saycheese 10y ago>> "The usage of HTTPS in combination with HSTS can reduce the effectiveness of QI. Also using a content delivery network (CDN) that offers low latency can make it very difficult for the QI packet to win the race with the real server." Above is from the researchers: https://blog.fox-it.com/2015/04/20/deep-dive-into-quantum-insert/ https://blog.fox-it.com/2015/04/20/deep-dive-into-quantum-in...
- ianopolous 10y agoIt's not clear to me how it is possible over https only sites without forging a certificate or MITMing the connection. The new content would have to be encrypted with the correct key. If indeed this is possible then the internet is totally broken. "Reduce the effectiveness" implies that it is still possible though.
- saycheese 10y agoNot sure it means the internet is broken, but would mean SSL is broken.