General question: 

I've done a number of searches and can't find a lot about the subject. [I've 
searched the list archives too...at least as best I could.]

In several cases, the most obvious being OpenVPN, I use client certificates 
generated by openssl, with a pass-phrase [password]. This means that if I ever 
have someone misplace the certificate, it can't be used without the password. 
[And I have little control about what users do with such things - they download 
and install software they shouldn't; They have unknown users use their 
machines; They get their machines/phones/tablets stolen etc.]

However, if someone loses control of the certificate, I need to consider the 
safety of the certificate. [And I have to assume I'll never know they lost 
control of it either.] Assume users are practicing reasonable security and it's 
unlikely an attacker will obtain the pass-phrase when they obtain the 
certificate. [A hard/bad thing to assume, I realize.]

So, I've seen reports of Elcomsoft's tool to attempt ~6K passwords a second 
against a certificate file. Let's assume two orders of magnitude better 
performance for a fairly determined attacker, and we're at 600K passwords per 
second. Three gets us 6M a second.

But even at 6M a sec, a non dictionary guessable pass-phrase of 10 characters 
will require ~380 years to break - which isn't too bad, IMO.  [Assume a 52 
character set. This obviously gets complicated since the pass-phase probably 
isn't completely random etc...but lets assume a theoretical 52 character random 
set.]

But since I can't find any reputable source for this kind of data, I'm 
questioning the assumptions above.

Can anyone give me some pointers at a reputable attempt at quantifying this? 
[The brute-force-ability and the speed at which it might be accomplished.]
Does anyone have a policy about loss of certificates and 
regeneration/revocation along with the underlying reasoning they're willing to 
share?

Or, perhaps I completely misunderstand what's going on, and I'd be glad to be 
corrected. [Gently is always nice.]

TIA
-Greg



Reply via email to