3 ms·
> Are you saying a more inflexible/less agile model is a better model? No I am saying there is no secure answer. Both choices result in the same thing use one
by dangerface 4y ago
> Are you saying a more inflexible/less agile model is a better model?
No I am saying there is no secure answer. Both choices result in the same thing use one primitive when it becomes broken the protocol is broken, or negotiate a primitive and face downgrade attacks that make the protocol broken.
There is no secure answer to stop mitm attack from the protocol level it has to come from cryptography at which point what happens when that cryptography is broken? The whole thing is a chicken and egg problem, there is no secure answer.
- orev 4y agoIt has to be taken as a given that all encryption deployed today will get “weaker” over time, so that’s already accounted for. The solution is that you just have to live with some risk from older algorithms, and make sure the replacement schedule is reasonably fast. You only need the absolute highest levels of security for a very few things, and if those are so critical then cutting off access is probably the right choice if the best algorithms aren’t available. Presumably those situations are in well-controlled environments and everyone is aware and can manage that type of coordination.