46
TLS INTERCEPTION CONSIDERED HARMFUL

TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

  • Upload
    hannob

  • View
    671

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

TLS INTERCEPTIONCONSIDERED HARMFUL

Page 2: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

ABOUT MEHanno Böck, https://hboeck.de/

Freelance journalist (often Golem.de)Fuzzing free software (Core InfrastructureInitiative)

Page 3: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

TLS VULNERABILITIESBEAST, CRIME, Lucky13, FREAK, SKIP, POODLE,Heartbleed, Logjam, MACE, ...

Page 4: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

BEASTExploits known issue in CBC mode of TLS 1.0 /SSL 3.0.Fix: Use TLS 1.1/1.2.Workaround: 1/n-1 record splitting.

Page 5: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

CRIMECompression leaks information aboutencrypted data.Solution: Disable compression.

Page 6: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

LUCKY THIRTEENTLS does MAC-then-Pad-then-Encrypt.Timing sidechannel: separating MAC errorsfrom padding errors.Workaround: Timing safe implementation(difficult).Solution: TLS 1.2 with Authenticated Encryption(only AES-GCM).

Page 7: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

POODLESSLv3 allows arbitrary content in padding.Solution for SSLv3: Don't use it.Solution for TLS: Check padding (must bezeros).

Page 8: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

FORWARD SECRECYCreate a temporary key for each connection.Protects from later key leakage.Hardly any reason not to use FS.

Page 9: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

LESSONS LEARNEDSecurity bugs in the protocol.Only TLS 1.2 using AES-GCM with ForwardSecrecy considered safe.TLS 1.0 with mitigations required for legacysupport, complicated.

Page 10: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

CERTIFICATE AUTHORITIESHundreds of CAs and sub-CAs.Each can issue certs for all domains.System is only as secure as the worst CA.

Page 11: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

CERTIFICATE AUTHORITIESMisissuance of certificate happens often:Comodo, Türktrust, CNNIC, IndiaCCA, Diginotar,ANSSI, ...

Page 12: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

SOLUTIONSMany proposals (Sovereign keys, TACK,Convergence, DANE, ...).Most of them never got deployed widely.

Page 13: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

HTTP PUBLIC KEY PINNING(HPKP)

First widely deployed mitigation for CA failures(Chrome and Firefox).Browsers also contain list of pre-pinned hosts.

Page 14: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

CERTIFICATETRANSPARENCY

Public log of all certificates.Promising, but only partly deployed yet.Chrome has preliminary support.

Page 15: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

CONCLUSIONMitigations for Certificate Authority problemsare finally coming.Proper certificate verification requiresknowledge about current developments.

Page 16: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

HTTPS USE IS GROWING... and that's a good thing.Certificates no longer expensive (StartSSL,Wosign, Let's encrypt).HTTPS guarantees secrecy and integrity (oftenforgotten).

Page 17: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)
Page 18: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)
Page 19: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)
Page 20: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

WEB TRAFFIC INTERCEPTIONProducts want to manipulate web traffic."Enterprise" security products, Antiviruses,Parental control, Adblockers, Ad injection, ...

Page 21: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

HTTPS MAN-IN-THE-MIDDLEPROXIES

HTTPS guarantees secrecy and integrity(!)."Solution": Let's install a certificate in theuser's browser and do a Man-in-the-Middle-attack.

Page 22: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

SUPERFISHAnalyzes images on webpages and providesmatching ads.Preinstalled on many Lenovo Laptops.

Page 23: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

SHARED CERTIFICATEAll installations of Superfish used the same rootcertificate.Problem: Private key can be extracted.

Page 24: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)
Page 25: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

KOMODIA SAN BUGKomodia products had another bug withSubject Alternative Name.Allows generic TLS interception for all productsusing Komodia.

Page 26: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

LAVASOFT / AD-ADWARE"Lavasoft’s most recent release of Ad-AwareWeb Companion (released on February 18th2015) does not include this capability, but weare not yet able to confirm with certainty thatthe compromised component of the KomodiaSSL Digestor has been removed." (LavasoftFacebook page)

Page 27: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

LAVASOFT / AD-ADWAREOr in other words: We have a severe securityvulnerability and we're not really sure if wefixed it.

Page 28: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

PRIVDOGPrivdog is a startup founded by MelihAbdulhayoğlu (CEO of Comodo).It replaces "dangerous" ads with its own ads.

Page 29: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

NO VERIFICATION OFCERTIFICATES

Privdog does not use a shared cert (we'll getback to that later).But it did not verify certificates at all.By the way: It also sent home all URLs visited inclear text.

Page 30: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

ANTIVIRUS APPLICATIONSINTERCEPTING TLS

Analysis of Avira, Kaspersky, ESET.None as bad as Superfish/Privdog, but all ofthem lowered TLS security in one way oranother.

Page 31: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

KASPERSKY / FREAKFREAK vulnerability: OpenSSL bug alloweddowngrade to export ciphers with 512 bit.Shortly after FREAK Kaspersky user warnedabout it in support forum.1.5 months later it was still not fixed.

Page 32: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

BREAKING HPKPShouldn't Key Pinning prevent TLS interceptionfrom happening?Browsers compromised: Didn't want to breakall TLS interception products.Manually installed certs override key pinning.No TLS interception software I tested checkedkey pinning header.

Page 33: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

RESPONSIBILITY SHIFTIf products intercept TLS they are responsiblefor certificate validation and TLSimplementation quality.Are they qualified?

Page 34: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

ADGUARDRegenerates cert, but always with same key.Chooses one out of 10 keys depending on CPU.

Page 35: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

NETFILTER SDKAdguard relied on Netfilter SDK (fileProtocolFilters.dll).Shared key can be trivially extracted.

Page 36: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

MEET PRIVDOG AGAINPrivDog also uses shared key.It was completely broken in two different ways.

Page 37: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

PROTOCOLFILTERS.DLLCoupoon, CashReminder, SavingsDownloader,Scorpion Saver, SavingsbullFilter, BRApp,NCupons, Nurjax, Couponarific, delshark,rrsavings, triosir, screentk, ...

Page 38: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)
Page 39: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)
Page 40: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

SYMANTEC DESKTOP EMAILENCRYPTION

The software formerly known as PGP.Only does TLS 1.0 without Forward Secrecy.

Page 41: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

ENTERPRISE APPLIANCESOpen question: How bad are they?Contact me if you have access.

Page 42: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

"ENTERPRISE" TLSF5 "we don't accept handshakes between 256and 512 bytes" bugPOODLE TLS (F5, A10, Cisco, Check Point,Juniper, IBM)MACE: Missing MAC and Finished messagecheck (Cisco, Fortinet, F5, Juniper)

Page 43: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

ALTERNATIVESFor many of the products that use TLSinterception the question is whether theyshould exist at all.If you want to modify traffic with user's consentdo it after the encryption (e. g. browserextension).

Page 44: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

TAKEAWAYS"Potentially unwanted applications" are asevere securiy threat.It should be considered malpractice.

Page 45: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

TAKEAWAYSTLS interception is dangerous.Nobody gets it right.Even security products fail.Don't mess with our TLS connections.

Page 46: TLS Interception considered harmful (Chaos Communication Camp 2015)

https://github.com/hannob/superfishyQuestions? Discussion?