4 ms·
> We said our updater using HTTP is secure, since the updates are cryptographically signed, like APT. With a 1024bit DSA key last I heard, not very secure. And
by Avamander 8y ago
> We said our updater using HTTP is secure, since the updates are cryptographically signed, like APT.
With a 1024bit DSA key last I heard, not very secure. And that is assuming the updater doesn't contain other flaws. The same assumption APT people made, which, who the could have guessed, was wrong.
> there is no solution (until universal SRI).
For first initial download, indeed, unless you ship using Windows Store for example.
- jbk 8y ago> With a 1024bit DSA key last I heard, not very secure. Breaking encryption of DSA and doing fake DSA messages are 2 very different tasks. > And that is assuming the updater doesn't contain other flaws. And you believe that a full TLS stack will have less flaws than a DSA-check? That Gnutls is simpler than gcrypt? Your argument about flaws would push to have simpler code, not more complex one.
- Avamander 8y agoI believe a full TLS stack has more scrutiny than your self-built DSA-check.