[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Should we settle on one SSL implementation?

On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 10:29 -0700, Robert Relyea wrote:
> Simo Sorce wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 16:11 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >   
> >> Well for that matter GLibC itself has MD5 in it....
> >>     
> >
> > Quick! Make it depend on NSS! :-)
> >   
> in progress.;).
> > /simo with 3 packages with the same bug filed I can't possibly fix as
> > NSS simply do not have the relevant algorithms ...
> >   
> Which algorithms are missing?
> If MD4 is one of the algorithms,  We have a plan for that. MD4 is 
> fundamentally broken, has been for 10 years. There is only one 
> legitimate use of MD4 that I know of and that is support NTLM 
> (Microsoft's old NT authentication mechanism). In this case we need a 
> common NTLM library that all NTLM users call. Any other use of MD4 needs 
> to be identified and potentially squashed. Blind use of MD4 is 
> detrimental to the security of our products.

I presume you are going to rework the rsync protocol too?

Andrew Bartlett

Andrew Bartlett
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org
Samba Developer, Red Hat Inc.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]