Re: Is SSL safe? 2/3rds of randomly chosen servers are vulnerable
From: Relayer Bin Geekin (relayer@dreamtheater.zzn.com)
Date: 03/24/03
- Next message: Relayer Bin Geekin: "Re: Is SSL safe? 2/3rds of randomly chosen servers are vulnerable"
- Previous message: Lord Shaoladin Moustachey: "Is SSL safe? 2/3rds of randomly chosen servers are vulnerable"
- In reply to: Lord Shaoladin Moustachey: "Is SSL safe? 2/3rds of randomly chosen servers are vulnerable"
- Next in thread: Relayer Bin Geekin: "Re: Is SSL safe? 2/3rds of randomly chosen servers are vulnerable"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: Relayer Bin Geekin <relayer@dreamtheater.zzn.com> Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 13:31:08 GMT
Lord Shaoladin Moustachey wrote:
> Czech security researchers this week claimed to have uncovered weaknesses in
> SSL that might permit crackers to decypher transmissions over supposedly
> secure links.
>
> However, independent cryptography experts, who are studying a paper from
> Czech security outfit ICZ, are yet to verify the risk is real and as serious
> as ICZ suggests - so the research needs to be treated with caution.
Is this the same SSL vulnerability released a few months ago or another one?
R.
>
>
> http://www.security-forums.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4500
>
- Next message: Relayer Bin Geekin: "Re: Is SSL safe? 2/3rds of randomly chosen servers are vulnerable"
- Previous message: Lord Shaoladin Moustachey: "Is SSL safe? 2/3rds of randomly chosen servers are vulnerable"
- In reply to: Lord Shaoladin Moustachey: "Is SSL safe? 2/3rds of randomly chosen servers are vulnerable"
- Next in thread: Relayer Bin Geekin: "Re: Is SSL safe? 2/3rds of randomly chosen servers are vulnerable"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]