3 ms·

The actual standard : http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/osg/001_099/001/01.01.01_60/gs_osg001v010101p.pdf http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/osg/001_099/001/

by brohee 11y ago

The actual standard : http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/osg/001_099/001/01.01.01_60/gs_osg001v010101p.pdf http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_gs/osg/001_099/001/01.01.01... There are only 3 pages on security (plus annexes). There is the broken MAC, but the cipher standardized is actually RC4... Without using the constructions that make it less insecure like discarding the first 3kb bytes of output. Also that little gem : An "invalid digest" response is never encrypted. Which is likely a textbook oracle. All of this is completely inexcusable for a specification published in 2012, a lot of it could have been stopped just reading a few Wikipedia entries. I guess a lot of the devices are going to landfills.

tptacek 11y ago
Just a quick pedantic note that RC4 is broken even if you discard keystream.
- brohee 11y ago
  Hence, "less insecure".
  - tptacek 11y ago
    RC4 is meaningfully, materially insecure virtually no matter what you do with it. I don't think you're disagreeing, but the nerdal lobe in my brain won't let me leave the discussion without it ending on that note. :)
pc2g4d 11y ago
"I guess a lot of the devices are going to landfills." I'm feeling doubtful that this will happen. More likely they live out their lives in insecurity until falling apart.