Morning. Just saw this: http://vrt-blog.snort.org/2014/04/heartbleed-continued-openssl-client.html Which I thought might be useful to know. -- Juha Saarinen twitter: juhasaarinen
Although clients are at risk, the vast majority of browsers do NOT use OpenSSL None of IE, Chrome, Firefox or Safari use OpenSSL, with the possible exception being on Android devices. Clients such as wget and curl will likely be vulnerable, but the impact is small - there isn't going to be much in memory that isn't already being sent to the remote server anyway. There's certainly some clients such as mail servers (when connecting to another mail server) where it's an issue, but in most cases those will be covered under the "server" category anyway. But yeah, point remains - update everywhere, even where you're not running TLS servers! Scott On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Juha Saarinen <juha(a)saarinen.org> wrote:
Morning. Just saw this:
http://vrt-blog.snort.org/2014/04/heartbleed-continued-openssl-client.html
Which I thought might be useful to know.
-- Juha Saarinen twitter: juhasaarinen <http://twitter.com/juhasaarinen>
_______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
On 10 Apr 2014, at 18:16, Scott Howard <scott(a)doc.net.au> wrote:
Although clients are at risk, the vast majority of browsers do NOT use OpenSSL
Note that a "reverse heartbleed" attack has been described, which has the potential to harvest data from clients who have connected to rogue servers (such as might be triggered by an embedded image in some spam, or by a similarly-crafted banner ad). http://blog.meldium.com/home/2014/4/10/testing-for-reverse-heartbleed In other news, Randall Munroe has managed once again to describe a potentially-complicated problem in a six-panel cartoon that a child would have no problem understanding: http://xkcd.com/1354/ Joe
participants (3)
-
Joe Abley -
Juha Saarinen -
Scott Howard