-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

on windows side, users (including me) are using, two firefox addons:
"Extended DNSSSEC Validator" (www.os3sec.org), "DNSSEC Validator"
(www.dnssec-validator.cz), and these two are able to use a local or
remote DNSSEC validation supported DNS-Resolver/Server, and seems to
be able to handle at-least "2 s m" and "3 s m" TLSA cases.

- -- Bright Star. (Bry8Star).



Received from Viktor Dukhovni, on 2013-05-28 8:51 AM:
> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 07:20:15AM -0700, Wes Hardaker wrote:
> 
>> It's worth noting, since Viktor unintentionally glossed over it, that
>> the base TLSA definition does include definitions for how to use it over
>> TLS and targeted toward HTTPS specifically, so another document isn't
>> needed for that case.  The other protocols he mentioned still need some
>> definition and binding, however.
> 
> Yes, my response was perhaps too brief.  For HTTPS, RFC 6698 is
> largely sufficient.  There is a corner case with "2 1 [12]" TLSA RRs
> and an unstated requirement for servers to include the TA certificate
> in their chain.  Many verifier implementations don't correctly handle
> "2 1 0" TLSA RRs.
> 
>>> OpenSSL does not yet provide ready-to-use DANE verification code,
>>> so applications based on OpenSSL have to roll their own.
>>
>> Or use another library that provides DANE validation hooks to use for
>> OpenSSL verification links.
>>
>> (eg: 
>> https://www.dnssec-tools.org/svn/dnssec-tools/trunk/htdocs/docs/tool-description/val_getdaneinfo.html
>>  )
>>
> 
> This library's (latest 2.0 release) implementation of certificate
> usage 2 is rather broken none of the "2 x y" cases are implemented
> correctly.
> 
> More fundamentally, this library is (as evidenced by the curl patch)
> intended to be used after a permissive SSL verification callback
> which ignores all errors (or equivalently with any callback and
> SSL_VERIFY_NONE set).  This will ignore parent-child signature
> errors and expiration problems in the certificate chain.
> 
> Since applications generally expect PKIX validation to performed
> during the handshake, application code that runs post-handshake
> rarely if ever performs a complete set of PKIX checks.
> 
> Thus also with certificate usage 0 and 1 the patched curl will not
> in fact validate the PKIX certificate chain.  So only certificate
> usage 3 may work (at first glance), the others are definitely
> broken.
> 
>> It shouldn't be hard to get up and running today, and many applications
>> and examples exist for you to glance at and study:
>>
>> https://www.dnssec-tools.org/svn/dnssec-tools/trunk/dnssec-tools/apps/curl/curl-7.29.0.patch
> 
> Which in turn breaks the patched curl.  Support for DANE in this
> library needs to be fixed or withdrawn.
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=F+jg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
dane mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane

Reply via email to