On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 6:26 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 2:47 AM, Yann Ylavic <ylavic....@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 3:19 AM, <wr...@apache.org> wrote: > >>> +SSLCipherSuite HIGH:MEDIUM:!aNULL:!MD5 > >>> +#SSLCipherSuite RC4-SHA:AES128-SHA:HIGH:MEDIUM:!aNULL:!MD5 > >> There possibly should be ":!EXP" in both suites above. > > Why? To make it more wordy? Strongly -1, this is why too many users get > their cipherlists wrong, they change one thing in an overly complex > expression already. EXP is classified LOW, already excluded above.
Sorry my bad, I read this as "ALL:+HIGH:+MEDIUM"... > > Note that this was not an editorial commit, it was a scope change that was > buried hidden from the 2.4 commit log. This simply brings 2.2 in line with > 2.4 and trunk. > >> Also I'd suggest removing RC4 from the latter suite, it is not >> considered secure ([1]), and maybe replace it with "AES128-SHA256" >> (both secure and fast with SNI). Hmm, I meant AES-NI here (the CPU builtin instruction set), not SNI of course :p >> >> [1] http://www.isg.rhul.ac.uk/tls/ > > It's branded as less secure as things stand. I'd be happy if we ripped that > example from all 2.2/2.4/trunk branches. > > That said, if you want to retain it, do you have benchmarks to point us at? E.g. https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Security_Guide/sect-Security_Guide-Encryption-OpenSSL_Intel_AES-NI_Engine.html > >> Ideally, we probably should merge r1526168 and r1527291 from trunk. > > Happy to consider such a proposal. > I'm working on it, thanks.
