Re: Heartbleed Impact

From: Dev Kumkar <devdas(dot)kumkar(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>
Cc: "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Heartbleed Impact
Date: 2014-04-16 15:44:39
Message-ID: CALSLE1NVD15+LjR+_Yg4HMLPCa6jca6-coAZYvBgzbquXEG3ow@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 6:49 PM, Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>wrote:

> Dev Kumkar wrote:
> >> Unless somebody changes the setting to ssl=on, there should be no
> problem.
>
> > Thanks also please help to understand - does changing this
> postgresql.conf setting enough to be
> > vulnerable here?
>
> Just changing the setting will only cause your database server to error
> out on restart - you also need to create certificates and put them into
> the server directory.
>
> So whoever does this change must know what they are doing (to some extent).
>
> Once SSL has been enabled, a cunning attacker may be able to steal
> the server's private key (if I understood the vulnerability correctly)
> and then launch man-in-the-middle attacks, i.e. impersonate the server,
> to eavesdrop on encrypted communication.
>
> The remedy would be to create a new key pair for the server.
>
> Yours,
> Laurenz Albe
>

Thanks, this really helps. Currently we are not creating certificate and
working in non SSL mode.

Regards...

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steve Crawford 2014-04-16 16:34:08 Re: timezone datetime issue
Previous Message Roxanne Reid-Bennett 2014-04-16 15:42:02 Re: Approach to Data Summary and Analysis