3 ms·
I hadn't heard of ChannelID before now, but that draft is clearly talking about client, not server authentication; it's a way for you to prove to HN that you're
by graue 13y ago
I hadn't heard of ChannelID before now, but that draft is clearly talking about client, not server authentication; it's a way for you to prove to HN that you're really 'codeka', not a way for HN to prove to you that it's really Hacker News (which is what SSL certs do).
- codeka 13y agoIt protects against more than that, from the RFC: > There are four classes of attackers against which we consider our security guarantees: passive network attackers, active network attackers, active network attackers with misissued certificates and attackers in possession of the legitimate server's private key. Basically (and this is just my understanding), it should mean a MITM cannot decode the encrypted stream even if he has the legitimate server's private key.
- agl 13y agoThat section is dealing purely with an attacker who wants to impersonate a ChannelID. It's correct that an attacker cannot fool the real server into believing that it is in possession of a ChannelID, even if the attacker has the server's private key (so long as the server is forward secure). However, that doesn't mean that the client isn't fooled. (Disclosure: I wrote that section of the draft.)