> We have cryptographic accelerators on cavium platforms which minimize CPU
> usage. So our customers are looking for 16K support.
Well, sorry, but by default most other sides won't be able to use them. Not
sure anything else to say.
--
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.op
Bonjour,
Le 22 juil. 2016 à 08:44, Gupta, Saurabh
mailto:saurabh.gu...@cavium.com>> a écrit :
1: I didn't get it, Why this behaviour is not coming for other ciphers while
doing the server/client handshake?
It should fail for other ciphers also.
Ciphers: working
DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA
ECDHE-RS
> The DoS issue is still there. How can you prevent the "other side" from
> consuming all your CPU with a large key?
> Who needs 16K RSA keys, such that openssl by default should support that for
> everyone?
We have cryptographic accelerators on cavium platforms which minimize CPU
usage. So
> 2: if anyway I want to use 16k modulus, Do we have solution to avoid this
> issue so that it won't harm to other application or create any new attack?
No.
--
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
1: I didn't get it, Why this behaviour is not coming for other ciphers while
doing the server/client handshake?
It should fail for other ciphers also.
Ciphers: working
DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA
ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384
.. etc
Ciphers: Not working
AES128-SHA
AES256-SHA
.. etc
Protocols:
> Wait, is OpenSSL "sanity checking" a message size dictated by the same ends
> local configuration against a fixed arbitrary limit rather than a limit
> computed
> from that local configuration?
Yup. Call it a limitation of C, if you want. "#define MAX_..." is just too
hard to avoid.
It has
On 21/07/2016 17:28, Salz, Rich wrote:
Again, I’m not saying using a 16kRSA key is a good idea. It’s not a good idea,
one should really consider ECC instead (both for performance and network
reasons). But keeping this 2048 bytes limit is not a security decision. It’s the
result of a trade-off cho
> Again, I’m not saying using a 16kRSA key is a good idea. It’s not a good idea,
> one should really consider ECC instead (both for performance and network
> reasons). But keeping this 2048 bytes limit is not a security decision. It’s
> the
> result of a trade-off choice, right. And that doesn't m
> Le 21 juil. 2016 à 15:08, Salz, Rich a écrit :
>
>> By raising the limit, you don’t suddenly put every application at risk of a
>> DoS,
>> because these applications won’t suddenly use a 16k RSA key.
>
> Yes we do, because the other side could send a key, not local config.
Server A code is
> Instead of raising the limit of client key exchange message length more than
> 2048, why can't we add the
> "ssl3_check_client_hello" functionality in the ssl/s3_srvr.c because that
> will "permit appropriate message length".
The DoS issue is still there. How can you prevent the "other side
-
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 12:15:15 +0000
From: "Salz, Rich"
To: "openssl-users@openssl.org"
Subject: Re: [openssl-users] Openssl software failure for RSA 16K
modulus
Message-ID:
Content-Type: t
>By raising the limit, you don’t suddenly put every application at risk of a
>DoS,
> because these applications won’t suddenly use a 16k RSA key.
Yes we do, because the other side could send a key, not local config.
--
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/l
> Le 21 juil. 2016 à 14:17, Salz, Rich a écrit :
>
>> We have to make trade-offs. Who uses a 16K RSA key?
>
> Let me add some clarification. Is it worth putting every application that
> uses OpenSSL at risk for a DoS attack with a 16K RSA key?
By raising the limit, you don’t suddenly put e
> We have to make trade-offs. Who uses a 16K RSA key?
Let me add some clarification. Is it worth putting every application that
uses OpenSSL at risk for a DoS attack with a 16K RSA key?
--
Senior Architect, Akamai Technologies
IM: richs...@jabber.at Twitter: RichSalz
--
openssl-users mai
> Largest accepted client key exchange message length seems to be set to 2048
> bytes.
> Key exchange for an RSA16k is slightly larger than that (exactly 2048 bytes
> of pure crypto payload, plus a few bytes of overhead).
> OpenSSL is too conservative here.
Why not use an ECC key?
We have to
Largest accepted client key exchange message length seems to be set to 2048
bytes.
Key exchange for an RSA16k is slightly larger than that (exactly 2048 bytes of
pure crypto payload, plus a few bytes of overhead).
OpenSSL is too conservative here.
Cordialement,
Erwann Abalea
Le 21 juil. 2016 à
This issue, I'm facing for openssl-1.0.2e/g/h version.
Run openssl server: Used 16K Certificate and Key
./openssl s_server -cert sercert16384.pem -key server16384
Run openssl client:
./openssl s_client -connect :port_number -cipher AES128-SHA -tls1
ERROR
139812135450280:error:1408E098:SSL routi
17 matches
Mail list logo