3 ms·

Your condescension is noted. The host key fingerprint does matter. That's the host's public key. The host also has a private key. Without that private key, Bob

by fwip 8y ago

Your condescension is noted. The host key fingerprint does matter. That's the host's public key. The host also has a private key. Without that private key, Bob can't pretend to be Eve. You are correct that when connecting to Bob, if his public key doesn't match Eve's expected key, it will prompt the user to cancel the connection. You argue: "It will only require the public key (which is public) to impersonate the server." The key piece here you are missing is that if Bob steals Eve's public key, he won't have a matching private key, and authentication will fail. If you don't think the private keys are important, go edit them on your server, and see how SSH'ing in goes for you.

nothrabannosir 8y ago
Eve is the bad guy, Bob is the intended party. Bob is not stealing keys, Eve is. Well, not "stealing", just obtaining public keys. The attack is on Alice, who thinks she's connecting to Bob, but is actually connecting to Eve. This is on initial connect, and assuming Alice doesn't check the host fingerprint (which nobody does; that's the crux of my point). This nomenclature is the convention when discussing cryptographic attacks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_and_Bob https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_and_Bob I'm going to stop discussing this in this thread, but feel free to contact me (info in profile). I promise to engage, in good faith, and if you do end up convincing me, I'll post an update here. Best wishes.
- fwip 8y ago
  Okay, swap Bob and Eve then.
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    Okay. "The attack is on Alice, who thinks she's connecting to Eve, but is actually connecting to Bob. Assuming Alice doesn't check the host fingerprint (which nobody does), the attack succeeds." You're fundamentally misunderstanding the argument about which key is being copied. It's Alice's public key that's copied. The fake server generates its own public and private keys and nobody notices that it doesn't match the real server. The user won't be "prompted to cancel" when this is their first time connecting. authorized_hosts, as typically used, prevents an imposter from showing up later. It does absolutely nothing to prevent an imposter that's there from the start.

by fwip 8y ago

nothrabannosir 8y ago

Eve is the bad guy, Bob is the intended party. Bob is not stealing keys, Eve is. Well, not "stealing", just obtaining public keys. The attack is on Alice, who thinks she's connecting to Bob, but is actually connecting to Eve. This is on initial connect, and assuming Alice doesn't check the host fingerprint (which nobody does; that's the crux of my point). This nomenclature is the convention when discussing cryptographic attacks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_and_Bob https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_and_Bob I'm going to stop discussing this in this thread, but feel free to contact me (info in profile). I promise to engage, in good faith, and if you do end up convincing me, I'll post an update here. Best wishes.

fwip 8y ago
Okay, swap Bob and Eve then.
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  Okay. "The attack is on Alice, who thinks she's connecting to Eve, but is actually connecting to Bob. Assuming Alice doesn't check the host fingerprint (which nobody does), the attack succeeds." You're fundamentally misunderstanding the argument about which key is being copied. It's Alice's public key that's copied. The fake server generates its own public and private keys and nobody notices that it doesn't match the real server. The user won't be "prompted to cancel" when this is their first time connecting. authorized_hosts, as typically used, prevents an imposter from showing up later. It does absolutely nothing to prevent an imposter that's there from the start.