2 comments

  • Schlagbohrer a minute ago

    It is wild to think that enabling HTTPS used to be difficult and expensive before Let's Encrypt came along in the wake of the Snowden revelations.

  • throw0101a 9 minutes ago

    In August an attacker was able to get a certificate issued even with multi-perspective validation:

    > For 33 hours in late August, a rival network hijacked a block of Hetzner-hosted infrastructure serving Softaculous and Virtualizor, using it to issue a valid TLS certificate and push a malicious software update. The stolen route was RPKI-invalid the entire time, on file, checkable by anyone. It still won on most of the internet.

    > At 20:57 UTC on 28 August, a network nobody at Hetzner or Softaculous had dealt with before started announcing 162.55.80.0/24 to the internet. It was a small, unremarkable-looking slice of Hetzner’s own address space — the block hosting Softaculous’s client area, its billing pages, and the update endpoint that every Virtualizor-licensed control panel on the internet periodically calls home to. For the next 33 hours, with an 11-hour lull in the middle, a meaningful share of global traffic bound for that block went to the hijacker instead. Some of it was Let’s Encrypt’s own domain-control validation, which is how the attacker walked away with a certificate for virtualizor.com that no browser would ever flag.

    * https://cloudpunk.blog/post/bgp-hijack-rpki-gap/

    So it's all very well to have multiple network locations to prevent hijacking on the path (i.e., you have to attack multiple paths), but if the network as a whole thinks the destination is someplace else then all those paths will lead to the same (false) location.

    Perhaps the CAB should consider RPKI validation as a "MUST" rather than piling on multiple sources of validation who still have the same single point of failure (the spoofing of the destination).