I’m not going to tell you about DigiNotar, whose file of bankruptcy this month held shock for no one after recently having lost the keys to the grand vault, in which the government held much stock. Though I have many comments upon the sophistication of the player that so thoroughly owned the most trusted agencies of the digital age….
The cracker hardly needed them skillz, considering it has been a challenge to keep that whole corrupt industry accountable. The trouble with the central authority system is that even if only one of the keys is compromised, the system is broken and gives no assurances whatsoever. No warning bells either. Just a sweet silent man in the middle, passing along all the best parts to his lover.
It’s not a joke for the 300,000+ people who documentedly had their emails and facepalms compromised. We thought he was kind to give an interview and we wait in awe for his next move.
I’m not going to mention the fatal flaws in certificate revocation that became embarrassingly apparent when the damage was done.
What’s hardly the matter since this kind of thing is bound to crop up, that hole in TLS was deemed unexploitable – now there’s a Titanic if I ever saw one. Un sinkable. Too fat to die.
SSL is an open book for those who dare to look, and it’s got more than a couple old bugs. It’s okay though, we can patch it, they will say. Dare to look the other way!
Not that you need those anyway, since there are some really nice sslsnarfing techniques out there that entirely forgo attacks on SSL as “too inefficient”.
But I say nay! Unacceptable. There is another way.. and we’re already doing it! We sign our own signatures and we back each other’s signatures.
Now that’s business, something that the companies on your CA trusted list were painfully aware of when they laid down the law of the code and put themselves on the trust list. Yet still ca-cert is not on your trust list, and warning bells fly off on some of the most trustworthy sites- self-signed ones.
Just don’t ask them why or how, or anything that isn’t directly relevant. Do you even know what is on your trust list? You might just be surprised at what you can find.
# ls -al /etc/ssl/certs | wc -l
How many of these do you trust? How many of these should you trust? I’ll tell you: *none*.
We should not be adding static lists of central signing authorities to our systems. This is a brittle and dangerous system. We knew this, but hackers have now thankfully demonstrated it.
A better way is for every person (and by extension every browser) to keep their own list of signing certs, and to exchange these certs with their friends (automagically, if you like). Your friends lists can come out of a social network, any social network, and it will mean that any site that has been vetted by one or more of your friends will likely be safe for you to use as well. It’s even better than that, you can check certs from multiple friends and detect discrepancies.
That, my friends, is called the Web of Trust, and is a design that is heading in the right direction. convergence.io is doing something similar already to a Firefox near you, while GPG has worked like this for three decades!
It has to be simple. It has to be very simple. And it has to be chemically free of one word: ‘central’.
One real easy way to do this on linux would be using git and signed manifests. I already do this in gone to assure that only files on a manifest signed by a trusted key get installed.