[jdev] self signed cert

[Dave Cridland]

On 3 May 2016 at 19:10, Tomasz Sterna <tomek at xiaoka.com> wrote:

> W dniu 03.05.2016, wto o godzinie 09∶40 -0700, użytkownik
> lists at lazygranch.com napisał:
> > I suspect you wouldn't want s2s to use a self signed cert, so
> > allowing two level of verification (c2s and s2s) sounds complex. You
> > fix one thing in software and you break something else.
>
> So, why would you allow self-signed on C2S?
>
> Why do you want to use encryption in the first place?
> So, no one is able to read the conversation, right?
> But self-signed cert does not give you this... Just a false illusion
> that you are protected from evesdropping.
> But self-signed does not protect you from man-in-the-middle attack, so
> basically still anyone able to tap the wire your transmission is going
> through is able to read it, with just slightly more effort.
>
>
I used to agree with you, but I've changed my mind over the years - it
turns out that because it forces an attacker to switch from passive
eavesdropping to active MITM, this is a blocker for the majority of
attackers, especially opportunistic or mass-surveillance actors.

So a self-signed cert is better than no cert at all (even if you want
something independently verifiable ideally).


>
> > I noticed the online documentation doesn't completely match the xml,
> > but there are enough comments in the xml that I could get close to
> > setting it up. It is just the certs that are confusing.
>
> Yeah. The real and up to date source of documentation are the comments
> in the configuration files.
>
>
> --
>  /o__
> (_<^' Practice is the best of all instructors.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> JDev mailing list
> Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
> Unsubscribe: JDev-unsubscribe at jabber.org
> _______________________________________________
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.jabber.org/jdev/attachments/20160504/00b30e57/attachment.html>