Re:CBCrypt: Encrypt from the client rather than send passwor...
by Stefan-H on Tuesday October 06, 2015 @11:42AM
(#10339634)
Not quite - a malicious server would receive the plaintext password in the current status quo.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:CBCrypt: Encrypt from the client rather than send passwor...
by Retric on Tuesday October 06, 2015 @11:53AM
(#10339750)
If a server just wants a hash, then that hash becomes the password. MITM attacks still work as long as all server credentials are public. EX: A fake wifi hotspot wants to MITM a connection and can fake any public information (public key's, IP's, DNS, etc.)
Further, a fake website can sidestep this by not using a secured connection and just faking the UI.
Re:CBCrypt: Encrypt from the client rather than send passwor...
by Stefan-H on Tuesday October 06, 2015 @12:17PM
(#10339958)
If you read the mechanism, you'll see that this involves more than a site faking the UI - it requires browser integration. This mechanism does not protect a single site, but rather the ability to pivot from one site to another with the same password or key. You also breeze over "can fake any public information" - I have no idea what you are trying to say by the ability to fake public keys - that is not really a thing. HTTPS rides on having a trusted intermediary and so even a malicious MITM couldn't simply fake a public key.
Re:CBCrypt: Encrypt from the client rather than send passwor...
by Retric on Tuesday October 06, 2015 @12:33PM
(#10340098)
You run into the question, is this the 'magic' UI or a PNG send from HAXORU.
Windows reserves CTRL + ALT + DEL for this reason, but doing that on a tablet / phone that's already in production quickly runs into issues. Also, windows had plenty of issues with fake login screens.
PS: I suspect protecting people from such things ends up requiring fairly strong AI or significant compromises.
Re:CBCrypt: Encrypt from the client rather than send passwor...
by StavrosK on Tuesday October 06, 2015 @11:48AM
(#10339670)
You could scrypt on the client.
Re:CBCrypt: Encrypt from the client rather than send passwor...
by ybx on Tuesday October 06, 2015 @11:52AM
(#10339726)
You're still passing the output to the server, which can be repeated. Certainly better than just a password, but not as good as public key crypto.
In the end, I'd probably prefer something like SRP
Re:CBCrypt: Encrypt from the client rather than send passwor...
by imaginenore on Tuesday October 06, 2015 @05:29PM
(#10342547)
> You're still passing the output to the server, which can be repeated.
Not if the server generates a unique ID for each attempt, and that ID must be used in hashing. It can be as simple as a timestamp.