"OpenSSL has exploit mitigation countermeasures to make sure it's exploitable" • Hacker News Board

Re: "OpenSSL has exploit mitigation countermeasures to make sure it's exploitable"

#201

Post by awj » Wed, Apr 09, 2014, 4:23 PM UTC

simias wrote: post #29

kzrdude wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's essential, that line is the message. A secure library should be defensive in coding style and implementation, not sloppy. It should have defaults that err on the safe side, not the fast side, if you have to choose.

It's a massive open source project that's more than 15 years in the making and supports a massive range of architectures and ever-moving standards. Shit happens, we need to figure out how to make sure it won't happen again at this scale, there's really no need for name calling.

If Heartbleed is the result of supporting a massive range of architectures and ever-moving standards, the answer is to do less. If OpenSSL can't maintain quality code and architecture support and feature support, the answer is NOT to let go of code quality.

Re: "OpenSSL has exploit mitigation countermeasures to make sure it's exploitable"

#202

Post by awj » Wed, Apr 09, 2014, 4:26 PM UTC

nosefrog wrote: post #169

mannykannot wrote: post #134

The 'many eyes' hypothesis has now been empirically tested.

Yes, and that's how this bug was found.

So "many eyes" means "paid researches at Google and a security firm"?

Also, this bug was in place for what, two years? If the many eyes hypothesis has a two year lead time to find bugs this severe, we can stop talking about it because it's fucking worthless.

Re: "OpenSSL has exploit mitigation countermeasures to make sure it's exploitable"

#203

Post by Sanddancer » Wed, Apr 09, 2014, 4:29 PM UTC

renox wrote: post #149

I find this remark quite funny from someone who is using C to write a "secure" OS..

Yes, C gives you a machine gun and no guard against your foot. However, the OpenBSD team also has a philosophy, and design measures, to ensure that said machine gun never gets anywhere near your foot. Given their security track record, I think they've done a pretty good job of such.

Can you give an example of a "secure" OS not written in C so I can see what this mythical beast looks like?

Re: "OpenSSL has exploit mitigation countermeasures to make sure it's exploitable"

#204

Post by recentdarkness » Wed, Apr 09, 2014, 4:32 PM UTC

JetSpiegel wrote: post #133

recentdarkness wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That page has not been changed since May 7th 2013, I am not sure that this is currently still actively pursued. Also I haven't seen this on the proposals for F21

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/21/ChangeSet#System-...

Good to know, I missed that obviously, but that might be because it wasn't a new proposal ;) I am following the proposal by email only and couldn't recall that one :-)

Re: "OpenSSL has exploit mitigation countermeasures to make sure it's exploitable"

#205

Post by Sanddancer » Wed, Apr 09, 2014, 4:36 PM UTC

caf wrote: post #142

baq wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

theo's an asshole, but he's quite often right. i don't like his attitude too, but it has to be said that in this particular case, consequences have been - and/or will be - extraordinary.

Well, really the consequences would have been virtually the same either way, since the number of OpenSSL deployments where the system malloc uses guard pages is a rounding error.

Yes, but because of the caching malloc, the OpenBSD implementations are just as affected as the rest of the world's. Irresponsible software design sucks, plain and simple.

Re: "OpenSSL has exploit mitigation countermeasures to make sure it's exploitable"

#206

Post by wadetandy » Wed, Apr 09, 2014, 4:39 PM UTC

andreasvc wrote: post #173

stiff wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had some problems expressing what bothers me clearly and edited the comment heavily, perhaps it makes more sense now. You're right it is not that surprising, but it's still disappointing that even the most rudimentary best practices are not adopted. Have a look at sqllite for comparison, also an open source project, also in C, certainly less mission critical, and what a difference: https://github.com/smparkes/sqlit…

sqlite does not seem less mission critical to me, and definitely relied on funding: "D. Richard Hipp designed SQLite in the spring of 2000 while working for General Dynamics on contract with the United States Navy.[7] Hipp was designing software used on board guided missile destroyers" -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sqlite#History

I work for a very large company that relies on a fork (with contributions back upstream) of SQLite for a majority of its massive enterprise SOA. It is not just unpaid volunteers keeping that project going.

Re: "OpenSSL has exploit mitigation countermeasures to make sure it's exploitable"

#207

Post by headShrinker » Wed, Apr 09, 2014, 4:41 PM UTC

TacticalCoder wrote: post #63

bhouston wrote: post #21

Has anyone started a rumor yet that the NSA infiltrated the OpenSSL development team to make OpenSSL ineffective and full of holes? The convoluted code of OpenSSL alone (from yesterday's Hackernews post) seems like a great way to add all sorts of "bugs" inadvertent or not. Unfortunately with the Snowden disclosures, there isn't much that I rule out of bounds for the NSA when it comes to things critical to internet se…

There's a talk that was given in Belgium / Brussels at FOSDEM2014 two months ago or so by Poul-Henning Kamp (FreeBSD) regarding the NSA and how he'd do it if he had to create holes in software: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwcl17Q0bpk He's talking specifically about OpenSSL quite a lot (basically saying it's too complex to ever be secure and probably received many "security patches" from NSA employees). The entire…

Sorry to introduce the hyperbole, or not moderate it.

When the government runs a campaign to cause the public to fear and doubt your neighbor that is the beginning of a dark time ahead. This idea that they are one of you, or someone on reddit is just poison.

On an emotional level, more and more Edward Showden is becoming a mystical figure.

Re: "OpenSSL has exploit mitigation countermeasures to make sure it's exploitable"

#208

Post by lucian1900 » Wed, Apr 09, 2014, 4:41 PM UTC

pritambaral wrote: post #191

lucian1900 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not aware of any long form text on this, but the issue is relatively straightforward. A publisher hires a studio to make a game, which then gets published on platforms that actively prevent users from (compiling and) running their own software (consoles, iOS). Since the user is not provided with the tools to replace a library used in a game, the terms of the LGPL cannot be met even if the studio were to release t…

Would a clause in LGPLv3 that exempts the publisher/distributor from limitations beyond their control (console/iOS restrictions) help? Also, I think the the user isn't prevented from recompiling and running altogether; a user can get a developer account. Although, I guess that presents an additional cost, something (L)GPL might be against.

A linking exception from the library authors could accomplish that, I believe it's what GCC uses. LGPLv2 may also be ok, but GPL licenses in general are complex enough that no one is entirely certain.

If the library is statically linked (which is the case at least on consoles), the user would also need the game's source code. I think the restriction is enough to trigger the (L)GPL clauses anyway.

Re: "OpenSSL has exploit mitigation countermeasures to make sure it's exploitable"

#209

Post by Sanddancer » Wed, Apr 09, 2014, 4:45 PM UTC

Tyrannosaurs wrote: post #126

MrBuddyCasino wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To quote Ted Dziuba: "Anyone who ever told you that swear words have no place in technical discussion is right. They're right, and sadly, they're part of the problem because they miss the point. The sterile word placement that's supposed to support an argument makes any true motivation indistinguishable from all the hired bullshit. [...] However, when someone starts swearing in technical discussion, showing emotion,…

Swearing isn't required for passion. Martin Luthor King didn't have an (expletive of choice) dream, he just had a dream. There are plenty of people who care about their work and manage to express that without swearing. Similarly there are plenty of people who swear about stuff who may well be committed but it's highly questionable about what they're committed to and whether it's to the benefit of the project / team.…

Theo has a twenty year record of being a brash, non-calm[1] asshole. The pesky problem is that he has this very bad habit of being right, especially when he is angry, brash and profane. So yes, he may indeed may need to enhance his calm, but at the same time, other software developers need to realize that the best course of action in avoiding his ire is to not write software that sucks.

[1] http://www.theos.com/dispute.html

Re: "OpenSSL has exploit mitigation countermeasures to make sure it's exploitable"

#210

Post by ScottBurson » Wed, Apr 09, 2014, 4:48 PM UTC

So what if someone tried to crowdfund a new implementation (or a thorough rewrite of OpenSSL, if that makes more sense). Could they raise something on the order of $1M? It seems like it would cost that much for, I'm guessing, three absolutely top developers for two years. Unlike a lot of crowdfunded projects, this one would not launch a business -- there's no additional revenue opportunity for the developers once it's completed -- so the amount would have to compensate them not just for their time but also for their opportunity cost.

On the other hand, given the importance of TLS to the Internet, $1M seems less than trivial -- literally pocket change, if the cost were well distributed among the millions of websites using SSL.

What do you think? Could it be done?