Re: openssl heartbleed

From: Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com>
To: Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>, "Gabriel E(dot) Sánchez Martínez" <gabrielesanchez(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: openssl heartbleed
Date: 2014-04-10 23:40:44
Message-ID: 53472BFC.6090504@pinpointresearch.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 04/10/2014 01:01 AM, Albe Laurenz wrote:
> Steve Crawford wrote:
>
>> If you aren't and weren't running a vulnerable version or if the
>> vulnerable systems were entirely within a trusted network space with no
>> direct external access then you are probably at low to no risk and need
>> to evaluate the cost of updates against the low level of risk.
> If you are in a totally trusted environment, why would you use SSL?
>

I didn't say *totally* trusted - that doesn't exist. We use secure
connections inside our firewall all the time and sometimes
authentication convenience is as much a driving factor as security.

I didn't suggest someone *avoid* updating keys/certificates - just to
evaluate cost vs. risk as one must always do. But I'd submit that anyone
seriously concerned about this attack being launched from within their
internal network has a whole bunch of higher-priority security problems.

-Steve

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Haribabu Kommi 2014-04-11 00:28:08 Re: HOT standby on windows not working
Previous Message CS_DBA 2014-04-10 22:15:01 HOT standby on windows not working