Re: openssl vulnerability and RSA keys

2008-05-15 Thread Kevin Buhr
Ross Boylan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The recent security advisory for Debian's version of openssl says that > you should regenerate all keys, and that DSA keys should be considered > compromised. > > Does this mean that RSA keys for openssh should not be considered > compromised? If so, why

Re: openssl vulnerability and RSA keys

2008-05-13 Thread Ron Johnson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05/13/08 19:36, Nelson Castillo wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 7:05 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On May 13, 2:20 pm, Ross Boylan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > Does this mean that RSA keys for openssh should not be conside

Re: openssl vulnerability and RSA keys

2008-05-13 Thread Nelson Castillo
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 7:05 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On May 13, 2:20 pm, Ross Boylan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Does this mean that RSA keys for openssh should not be considered > > compromised? If so, why the need to regenerate them? > > On our systems the dowkd.

Re: openssl vulnerability and RSA keys

2008-05-13 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On May 13, 2:20 pm, Ross Boylan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does this mean that RSA keys for openssh should not be considered > compromised? If so, why the need to regenerate them? On our systems the dowkd.pl script found weak DSA and RSA keys, both as host keys, and as user-generated keypairs.

openssl vulnerability and RSA keys

2008-05-13 Thread Ross Boylan
The recent security advisory for Debian's version of openssl says that you should regenerate all keys, and that DSA keys should be considered compromised. Does this mean that RSA keys for openssh should not be considered compromised? If so, why the need to regenerate them? Thanks. Ross Boylan