-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 23-12-13 18:30, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 05:49:40PM +0100, Tom Hendrikx wrote:
> 
>>> I am still fixing it for clarity, but it should be accurate. 
>>> Feedback is welcome.
>>> 
>> 
>> After reading, I'm having some questions.
> 
> s/reading/skimming/ :-)
> 
>> The document states that forward secrecy is supported by default
>> on recent postfix installs. However, the quick-start still has
>> some settings that apparently need tweaking.
> 
> They don't *need* tweaking.  However, the "tweaked" settings are 
> *recommended.
> 
>> Setting 'smtpd_tls_eecdh_grade = strong' is already available as 
>> default (tested with postfix 2.10), so no actual work here.
> 
> As stated.
> 
>> Setting the files (and refreshing them using a cronjob) specified
>> by 'smtpd_tls_mumble_param_file' is a bit unclear though. The
>> default for these params is empty, and setting them does not
>> really show a different behavior in postfix (i.e. using different
>> ciphers and keys) as far as visible from the logged information.
> 
> http://www.postfix.org/FORWARD_SECRECY_README.html#server_fs
> 
> ...
> 
> Postfix >= 2.2 support 1024-bit-prime EDH out of the box, with no 
> additional configuration, but you may want to override the default 
> prime to be 2048 bits long, and you may want to regenerate your 
> primes periodically.
> 
>> But since forward secrecy is supported by default, what does it
>> help to specify these params, and re-generate them once in a
>> while?
> 
> The default non-export prime is 1024 bits.  As explained in the 
> document, you should consider using a 2048 bit non-export prime.
> 
> The best-attacks on prime EDH are "pre-computation" attacks, where 
> one spends a bunch of time computing a bunch of data about a 
> particular prime, and is then able to quickly solve the underlying 
> problem much faster for any input.
> 
> Though prime lengths are chosen based such pre-computation attacks 
> (rule of thumb is that for equivalent security EDH primes should be
> about as long as RSA moduli) which are believed to be out of reach
> for 2048 bit primes and perhaps still out of reach even for 1024
> bit primes, one can make the attacks much less attractive by 
> frequently generating new primes independently at each site.
> 
> The compiled-in default prime in the Postfix source code is
> perhaps within reach of the best-funded adversaries, who may have
> performed the requisite pre-computation.  Primes you generate on
> your server, and use for a short time are unlikely to warrant the
> extraordinary cost of the pre-computation attack.
> 
>> I've no deep ssl knowledge, but the smtpd_tls_dh1024_param_file
>> postconf documentation seems to indicate that openssl distributes
>> some kind of defaults for these contents?
> 
> I don't believe that OpenSSL provides default parameters, but 
> Postfix does.
> 
>> Maybe it's a nice idea to make the forward secrecy and/or
>> postconf documentation a bit verbose on how this works, and what
>> benefits manual generation of these params has?
> 
> The more advanced material we put in the document, the more 
> intimidating it will be for the average reader.  But of course an 
> empty document is not optimal, so we have to aim for the middle.

As stated, I assumed that the default primes came from openssl, based
on the smtpd_tls_dh1024_param_file description in postconf(5). While
reading 'using the exact same parameter sets as distributed with other
TLS packages', I was assuming 'other TLS packages' to be other
(non-postfix, non-SMTP) software packages also using openssl.

After another re-read of the forward secrecy document (and from your
reply), I now found the part that states that the default primes are
postfix builtins. I missed this link.

So it doesn't have to be more technical or advanced. There were some
connections between dots missing in the higher level picture.

Tom
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJSuHsrAAoJEJPfMZ19VO/1MY0P/RkJMxLYu77l8QVfQjuwQdk1
4xgMXiyR0IC8tSKFuulwX/sl+YoFcv2wkjupx0ZwTkVg32feccAUgnzy3wVfe3UM
Di5sxIdNq7M2MOb/O3nuoGkKiFDTtd/PXpInI6iLtKL9ADKXPwsbikQda1BEbV++
lO9BsVA1sJsAJOl40nOvx639cFQCEoLyAkuIgk6dZ//7sn1jmIFpYnZhkFvPo2rT
Y+3xwGtK+kz2E/b2uutkCO203iCf6hSkyV/jSF2rHl9L/iOkH2ohwt3ICrlH3r38
9Q3TUeMkJzWrHC1ME+LHA5bPhmKdtFsPywZHCWEMK/91U1EQSw8MI6JLHwiC9SZQ
JspWkm2JroIrkHl1mKHWi3IazI2hRTgjhmGwkaHy8+m3Cvkq5u9W8jEIBQ045luF
gKnCQdaDnfA0htg1dGmvpFItQeddraG+7DcXFDKtPny/mo3oTfAoSgiO3dKIjEDm
NihRXgJAtfJRXZG+vLGW0G/+h1DHT5u+l0l9W+TntJi9F2gBk1L6Lz+RSH9Jg5Cc
WBAvu2FH1HpoiTNKfdJu3Oi8P0PaSIbnwtODWZ0VVaRVT+YQgGkgjyMcMsvJkEF7
WknGNWBGk5/2n5/x7E/yX1VIV0416ehZSom0C/eBUZxCWAiidZwrRB+hQrcqGJUU
UfgkVU/WR+i9bBSxByEa
=i2Yp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to