21.03.2013 Views

Problem - Kevin Tafuro

Problem - Kevin Tafuro

Problem - Kevin Tafuro

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Currently, OCSP is not nearly as widely recognized or implemented as CRLs are, so<br />

unless you know that all your users will have an OCSP responder available, it is generally<br />

best to use the technology to supplement CRLs rather than to replace them<br />

completely.<br />

OCSP introduces a significant potential for three types of attacks:<br />

Denial of service attacks<br />

Most servers are vulnerable to denial of service attacks to some extent, but the<br />

nature of the service, the amount of information transferred, and the way<br />

requests are handled help determine just how vulnerable a given server is to such<br />

an attack. The details of denial of service attacks are beyond the scope of this<br />

book; note, however, that OCSP responders are typically more susceptible to<br />

these attacks than are other common services such as HTTP, for example.<br />

Replay attacks<br />

The OCSP Version 1 specification allows responders to preproduce signed<br />

responses in an effort to reduce the load on the responder required by signing<br />

definitive responses. Allowing for preproduced signed responses opens the door<br />

for replay attacks.<br />

Man-in-the-middle attacks<br />

Man-in-the-middle attacks are possible because error responses are not signed.<br />

Note that it is possible to consider this type of attack a denial of service attack.<br />

Perhaps what is most disturbing about these vulnerabilities is the fact that although<br />

the RFC notes each one nothing was done to prevent them when formalizing the<br />

standard.<br />

There are only a handful of public OCSP responders available at the time of this writing,<br />

as listed by OpenValidation.org. The small number of responders is a clear indication<br />

that OCSP is not widely deployed. While it is an attempt at resolving the<br />

problems of CRLs, we feel that the additional problems it creates, at least in its current<br />

state, outweigh the problems that it solves. Certainly, it cannot be reasonably<br />

considered a replacement for CRLs. In its defense, an IETF draft was submitted in<br />

March 2001 for Version 2 of the protocol, which addresses some of the issues, but<br />

this has not yet completed the standards process, and is far from being deployed.<br />

We cover use of OCSP using OpenSSL in Recipe 10.12.<br />

Certificate hierarchies<br />

A certificate that is issued by a CA can be used to issue and sign another certificate, if<br />

the issued certificate is created with the appropriate permissions to do so. In this<br />

way, certificates can be chained. At the root of the chain is the root CA’s certificate.<br />

Because it is at the root of the chain and there is no other authority to sign its certificate,<br />

the root CA signs its own certificate. Such a certificate is known as a self-signed<br />

certificate.<br />

Understanding Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) | 511<br />

This is the Title of the Book, eMatter Edition<br />

Copyright © 2007 O’Reilly & Associates, Inc. All rights reserved.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!