On Sun, 2012-09-09 at 17:40 +0200, Domen Kožar wrote:
> According
> to 
> https://github.com/gavincarr/mod_auth_tkt/blob/master/conf/02_auth_tkt.conf 
> and
> http://linux.die.net/man/3/mod_auth_tkt, mod_auth_tkt supports SHA256
> and SHA512 since version 2.1
> 
> 
> Relevant: https://bitbucket.org/ianb/paste/changeset/7f90a96378ed\


Cool.  We should do something similar I guess.
> 
> On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Chris McDonough <chr...@plope.com>
> wrote:
>         On Sun, 2012-09-09 at 06:55 -0700, Florian Rüchel wrote:
>         > I was getting interested in how Pyramid's authentication
>         works and
>         > looked through the commonly used AuthTktAuthenticationPolicy
>         code. I
>         > found out it uses MD5 and the only thing keeping the cookie
>         from being
>         > forged is the secret.
>         >
>         > I see two different issues here:
>         > First, MD5 is already known to have weaknesses and it would
>         be a good
>         > idea to have different algorithms available so they can be
>         set. This
>         > shouldn't be very hard to implement (I can write a patch if
>         you
>         > desire) and it can improve the security of any site.
>         > Second, since everything depends on the single secret, I
>         think it
>         > should be documented better (communicated on at least the
>         docstring
>         > and the documentation) that the secret has to be strong
>         (long, random,
>         > maybe state a minimum length).
>         >
>         
>         
>         It would be fine by me if we made it possible to change the
>         hashing
>         algorithm.  But it probably needs to continue to support md5,
>         because
>         it's purpose is to be compatible with Apache mod_auth_tkt
>         cookies.  I
>         would be happy to accept a patch that allowed folks to plug in
>         a
>         different hashing algorithm, and explain to them that if they
>         do, it
>         will no longer be compatible with those cookies.
>         
>         There are also existing options that can help make it stronger
>         regardless of the hash, such as including the IP in the token,
>         IIRC.
>         
>         - C
>         
>         
>         --
>         You received this message because you are subscribed to the
>         Google Groups "pylons-devel" group.
>         
>         To post to this group, send email to
>         pylons-devel@googlegroups.com.
>         To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-devel
>         +unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>         For more options, visit this group at
>         http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-devel?hl=en.
>         
>         
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "pylons-devel" group.
> To post to this group, send email to pylons-devel@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to pylons-devel
> +unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-devel?hl=en.


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"pylons-devel" group.
To post to this group, send email to pylons-devel@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
pylons-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-devel?hl=en.

Reply via email to