Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 17:39:16 +0000 From: Loganaden Velvindron <loganaden@...il.com> To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com Cc: CVE ID Requests <cve-assign@...re.org> Subject: Re: CVE's for SSLv2 support On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Kurt Seifried <kseifried@...hat.com> wrote: > So there is this proposed RFC: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6176 > > TL;DR: SSLv2 needs to be shot. > > Now we have yet another significant SSLv2 problem, DROWN, bad enough in > fact that Red Hat has now disabled SSLv2 in OpenSSL by default (already > done in NSS/GnuTLS), so from my vendor perspective, we're treating SSLv2 > support as a security problem, the solution of which is to remove said > support. > > But more generally, should we look at assigning CVE's for support of SSLv2, > much like we would for products supporting DES or other known insecure > cryptographic algorithms, hashes, digests and protocols? My personal vote > is for yes. > > > > Btw, FreeBSD has done some work there: https://wiki.freebsd.org/LibreSSL/PatchingPorts#SSLv2.2FSSLv3_method_failures Linking with LibreSSL would help uncover those cases, and assign CVEs :) > > > -- > Kurt Seifried -- Red Hat -- Product Security -- Cloud > PGP A90B F995 7350 148F 66BF 7554 160D 4553 5E26 7993 > Red Hat Product Security contact: secalert@...hat.com >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.