> Man in the middle is actually one of the most difficult to setup and
> have actually productive.   You would probably have to be the end
> user's ISP to do it effectively.

I disagree.  I've seen it done, and it wasn't that difficult.

The server in question did not use SSL at all.  If it had a mechanism for
encryption with no authentication (as a few people have been claiming to
be desirable), it wouldn't have helped.  With a CA-signed cert, the perps
couldn't have gotten away with it.

In this specific case, the perps broke into the name server at the ISP
(using an IIS vulnerability) and changed the A record for the customer's
server to point to their own server.  Whenever someone connected to port 80
on this MITM server, it would open a port 80 connection to the real server
and pass data both ways.  But they probably logged the data.  It was
detected about two weeks later when someone looked at the server logs and
noticed that every HTTP request for those two weeks came from the same
IP address.

Note that even the CA procedures that some people consider lax (only
verifying domain authority) would have been sufficient to prevent this
attack.

There are several other reasonably simple threat scenarios which
can be averted by use of proper certs but not by use of non-authenticated
encryption.  Hence my claim that non-authenticated encryption is
almost worthless.  Perhaps worse than worthless, since it will give
people a false sense of security.

Eric



Reply via email to