Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why is nobody using SSL client certificates?

pilif.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 160 posts

Re: Why is nobody using SSL client certificates?

#121

Post by gcb0 »

pilif wrote: post #109
gcb0 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the malware point is moot. malware can steals passwords saved, which are optionally saved encrypted. the cert at least in the one browser i checked is always encrypted. and even then, if you have malware in your box, any and all security measures are worthless at this point. decent Renegotiation and mobile client support will come if people using that on the desktop request the feature. it's like that for everything…

What I meant about malware is that client certificates can't provide additional security over passwords because malware can easily steal both. So it's only hassle and no advantage, hence, useless

Not really. you could use a storage medium that is remote and load it in memory only, if the usage justified.... not case, for reasons you outlined eloquently on the article.

Also, the client cert, as with private keys, allows you to memorize ONLY ONE password (make it a passphrase, please) instead of a bazillion (or, gasp, reusing).

So, no, it's not an extra hassle. it's a solution for the real hassle of passwords in websites. if it was used.

Re: Why is nobody using SSL client certificates?

#122

Post by 616c »

icebraining wrote: post #34
616c wrote: post #19

I use it for StartSSL. It allows me to use SSL client cert auth for their OpenID instance.[0] I use it to log into StackOverflow and a few prominent sites. I like the idea of my cert provider being a trusted party for auth for other sites. However, trusting anyone other than himself in this post-PRISM era is probably a mistake. [0] http://www.startssl.com/?app=14

It's so annoying that OpenID providers either support client certs or using your own domain, but never both!

I have not tried both, so I did not experience this problem. I do know SSL client certs do not work well, and wanted to work on building my own solution that does what StartSSL (an OpenID endpoint with SSL-cert based authentication). Does anyone know of ways to do this?

Re: Why is nobody using SSL client certificates?

#123

Post by BHSPitMonkey »

wmf wrote: post #49
count wrote: post #11

The whole DOD is using it, but they're on crypto smart cards, so many folks don't realize that's what they're doing. Email, single sign on, web site auth, etc. Works great!

I've always liked the idea of smart cards, but I also wonder how I would use a smart card to simultaneously log in to a site from, say, my PC and phone. It seems like the card can only be plugged in one place.

Well your phone already has one smart card plugged into it all the time (assuming it's a GSM phone). Perhaps there's a clever way to leverage that as one factor in the authentication process.

Re: Why is nobody using SSL client certificates?

#124

Post by marshray »

jlgaddis wrote: post #89
gcb0 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the malware point is moot. malware can steals passwords saved, which are optionally saved encrypted. the cert at least in the one browser i checked is always encrypted. and even then, if you have malware in your box, any and all security measures are worthless at this point. decent Renegotiation and mobile client support will come if people using that on the desktop request the feature. it's like that for everything…

Certificates can also be marked as non-exportable.

Unless there's some trusted hardware involved, I doubt that effectively prevents malware from getting them.

Re: Why is nobody using SSL client certificates?

#125

Post by marshray »

arscan wrote: post #32
count wrote: post #11

The whole DOD is using it, but they're on crypto smart cards, so many folks don't realize that's what they're doing. Email, single sign on, web site auth, etc. Works great!

True, it works great for the average dod user (and in an enterprise in general) because they have a helpdesk that sets everything up for them. Once its configured it works fine, which is consistent with the message of this article. Good luck to them if they want to install a different browser (non-IE) or do anything non-standard... if they even are allowed to do so.

Firefox did a lot of work to make CAC cards work for the DoD, they didn't develop a FIPS module just for the fun of it.

Re: Why is nobody using SSL client certificates?

#126

Post by marshray »

joshuaellinger wrote: post #85

The reason I would like a client certificate solution that worked (even if it was a malware target) is that I could reject all web traffic to my applications if they came in without a cert. It would decrease my public footprint dramatically. I don't mind approving a user once per device. We've got to set them up anyway.

Use client certs then? Why do you feel current solutions don't work?

Re: Why is nobody using SSL client certificates?

#127

Post by dredmorbius »

peterwwillis wrote: post #92
gcb0 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the malware point is moot. malware can steals passwords saved, which are optionally saved encrypted. the cert at least in the one browser i checked is always encrypted. and even then, if you have malware in your box, any and all security measures are worthless at this point. decent Renegotiation and mobile client support will come if people using that on the desktop request the feature. it's like that for everything…

And managing multiple devices is actually a security boon. If your auth creds get stolen you'll know what specific device was compromised and can revoke the one vs a reset of all creds. Also agree that malware is moot (it can steal auth tokens live as they're submitted, so even physical tokens requiring 2-factor pins get compromised). The problem is browsers haven't been proactive in making the technology user friend…

That's a reason I use different sets of SSH keys from different hosts, or at least different classes of hosts.

It's rather troubling to find that many SSH management tools (including Puppet/Chef recipes) deal poorly with multiple keys per user.

Re: Why is nobody using SSL client certificates?

#128

Post by dredmorbius »

count wrote: post #81
Spearchucker wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy enough to use on a smart card, but try setting that up. I'm trivialising now, but you're looking at... - Card manufacture - Key handling - Enrolment - Card lifecycle - Certificate lifecycle - Identity synchronisation You could buy a stack of white-labelled cards, of it you're the DoD you'd roll your own. That's shopping for silicon wafers, contact plate assemblies, mag stripes, holograms, RFID blanks, plast…

You're right, it's a ridiculously large organizational overhead. Not to mention the CA's become single-point-of-compromise for the whole PKI. Even after 10 years or so of the CAC, the DoD process is still not pain-free. They've finally moved to OCSP instead of CRLs, which helps (the CRL is so large now that it will bluescreen Windows on import to the registry, haha) some of the pain. Even the DoD doesn't roll it's ow…

the CA's become single-point-of-compromise for the whole PKI. It's a bit more nuanced than that. A compromised CA can issue new certs which can spoof old one's identity, but it can't be used to create certs which will read traffic from an existing host. The big risk is that someone is subject to a MITM attack, doesn't clue in on the certificate change (their client should note this), and accepts the new key.

Signed / validated keys (used for major sites in some browsers) also help this somewhat.

Not that SSL/TLS isn't a huge mess.

Re: Why is nobody using SSL client certificates?

#129

Post by mpyne »

mcguire wrote: post #113
stonemetal wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience that is the common case, work for a defense contractor not on, but near a military base. I very well could be wrong though.

I don't work for the DoD, but you have the process right as far as I've seen. Don't forget that they seem to want a new set of fingerprints every time you go in.

Yeah, it does suck to be CTR, I'll admit. Especially if you need separate CAC credentials for things like base access.

Re: Why is nobody using SSL client certificates?

#130

Post by zobzu »

pilif wrote: post #46

I'm the author of this post which I have written in 2008. Since then my views have changed a bit: for one, the added security is debatable as the client cert is easily accessible to malware and thus could easily be stolen. The other thing is that renegotiation is somewhat broken since that related security flaw in 2010ish, so you can't have parts of a site accessible without client certs and other parts requiring a c…

Persona synchronizes client private keys. Its not SSL Client certs but its not all that bad.

What I'd like is the same thing but be the owner of the private keys, stored on my external, physical token.

This works with SSL client certs, yes, but its a pita, and there is no trust from the client by the server if its never been seen before.

GnuPG actually works like that properly (with the MonkeySphere project for the web stuff), but its not used anywhere..

Post reply on HN