Please upgrade your version of open SSL

[TMM]

Open SSL has a critical vulnerability, all programs using a must upgrade to ensure complete SSL security
here are some articles that you may find interesting on this topic
keep up the good work Paul



A missing bounds check in the handling of the TLS heartbeat extension can be used to reveal
up to 64k of memory to a connected client or server.

Only 1.0.1 and 1.0.2-beta releases of OpenSSL are affected including 1.0.1f and 1.0.2-beta1.

Thanks for Neel Mehta of Google Security for discovering this bug and to Adam Langley
<agl@chromium.org> and Bodo Moeller <bmoeller@acm.org> for preparing the fix.

Affected users should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.0.1g. Users unable to immediately upgrade can
alternatively recompile OpenSSL with -DOPENSSL_NO_HEARTBEATS.

1.0.2 will be fixed in 1.0.2-beta2.


The TOR Project summed it up:

● https://blog.torproject.org/blog/openss ... -2014-0160

A new OpenSSL vulnerability on 1.0.1 through 1.0.1f is out today, which can be used to reveal
memory to a connected client or server.

If you're using an older OpenSSL version, you're safe.

Note that this bug affects way more programs than just Tor — expect everybody who runs an
https webserver to be scrambling today. If you need strong anonymity or privacy on the
Internet, you might want to stay away from the Internet entirely for the next few days while
things settle.

Here are our first thoughts on what Tor components are affected:

Clients: Tor Browser shouldn't be affected, since it uses libnss rather than openssl. But Tor
clients could possibly be induced to send sensitive information like "what sites you visited in this
session" to your entry guards. If you're using TBB we'll have new bundles out shortly; if you're
using your operating system's Tor package you should get a new OpenSSL package and then be
sure to manually restart your Tor.
Relays and bridges: Tor relays and bridges could maybe be made to leak their
medium-term onion keys (rotated once a week), or their long-term relay identity keys. An
attacker who has your relay identity key can publish a new relay descriptor indicating that you're
at a new location (not a particularly useful attack). An attacker who has your relay identity key,
has your onion key, and can intercept traffic flows to your IP address can impersonate your
relay (but remember that Tor's multi-hop design means that attacking just one relay in the
client's path is not very useful). In any case, best practice would be to update your OpenSSL
package, discard all the files in keys/ in your DataDirectory, and restart your Tor to generate
new keys.

Hidden services: Tor hidden services might leak their long-term hidden service identity
keys to their guard relays. Like the last big OpenSSL bug, this shouldn't allow an attacker to
identify the location of the hidden service, but an attacker who knows the hidden service identity
key can impersonate the hidden service. Best practice would be to move to a new
hidden-service address at your convenience.

Directory authorities: In addition to the keys listed in the "relays and bridges" section
above, Tor directory authorities might leak their medium-term authority signing keys. Once
you've updated your OpenSSL package, you should generate a new signing key. Long-term
directory authority identity keys are offline so should not be affected (whew). More tricky is that
clients have your relay identity key hard-coded, so please don't rotate that yet. We'll see how
this unfolds and try to think of a good solution there.

Tails is still tracking Debian oldstable, so it should not be affected by this bug.

Orbot looks vulnerable; we'll try to publish more details here soon.

It looks like most of the webservers in the https://www.torproject.org/ rotation need
upgrades too, and maybe we'll need to throw away our torproject SSL web cert and get a new
one — hopefully we'll deal with all that soon.

Ars Technica
http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/04 ... irds-of-th
e-web-to-eavesdropping/ / Dan Goodin - Apr 8, 2014 12:10 am UTC

<quote> Researchers have discovered an extremely critical defect in the cryptographic software
library an estimated two-thirds of Web servers use to identify themselves to end users and
prevent the eavesdropping of passwords, banking credentials, and other sensitive data.
Default SSL package used by Apache... as well as just about everything else that's not
Microsoft-based.

<quote> The bug, which has resided in production versions of OpenSSL for more than two
years, could make it possible for people to recover the private encryption key at the heart of the
digital certificates used to authenticate Internet servers and to encrypt data traveling between
them and end users. Attacks leave no traces in server logs, so there's no way of knowing if the
bug has been actively exploited. Still, the risk is extraordinary, given the ability to disclose keys,
passwords, and other credentials that could be used in future compromises. The researchers, who work at Google and software security firm Codenomicon, said even after
vulnerable websites install the OpenSSL patch, they may still remain vulnerable to attacks. The
risk stems from the possibility that attackers already exploited the vulnerability to recover the
private key of the digital certificate, passwords used to administer the sites, or authentication
cookies and similar credentials used to validate users to restricted parts of a website. Fully
recovering from the two-year-long vulnerability may also require revoking any exposed keys,
reissuing new keys, and invalidating all session keys and session cookies.

http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2014/ ... urvey.html

OpenSSL is by far the Internet's most popular open-source cryptographic library and TLS
implementation. It is the default encryption engine for Apache, nginx (pronounced "engine-x"),
which according to Netcraft runs 66 percent of websites. OpenSSL also ships in a wide variety of
operating systems and applications, including the Debian Wheezy, Ubuntu, CENTOS, Fedora,
OpenBSD, FreeBSD, and OpenSUSE distributions of Linux. The missing bounds check in the
handling of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) heartbeat extension affects OpenSSL 1.0.1
through 1.0.1f.

So... Can it be exploited? The researchers who discovered it wrote:

"We attacked ourselves from outside, without leaving a trace. Without using any privileged
information or credentials, we were able steal from ourselves the secret keys used for our SSL
certificates, user names and passwords, instant messages, emails and business critical
documents and communication."

Writes Dan: They called on white-hat hackers to set up "honeypots" of vulnerable TLS servers
designed to entrap attackers in an attempt to see if the bug is being actively exploited in the
wild.
Heatbeat CAN be disabled in OpenSSL through a recompile... but then you might as well update
to 1.0.1g.

Good coverage at: http://heartbleed.com/

History:
● v0.9.8 / July 5, 2005
● v1.0.0 / March 29, 2010
● v1.0.1 March 14, 2012
○ Successor of 1.0.0h
○ Supports TLS v1.2
○ SRP support
○ TLS "Heartbeat" RFC 6520 / February 2012
○ TLS is based on reliable protocols, but there is not necessarily a feature available to
keep the connection alive without continuous data transfer. The Heartbeat
Extension as described in this document overcomes these limitations. The user can
use the new HeartbeatRequest message, which has to be answered by the peer
with a HeartbeartResponse immediately.
● v1.0.1g - Now available
● v1.0.2 - in beta release, coming soon. Netcraft:
http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2014/ ... -vulnerabl
e-to-heartbleed-bug.html



The Code Diff:
https://github.com/openssl/openssl/comm ... d6c108e9a3
http://pastebin.com/5PP8JVqA

Analysis of the bug:
http://blog.existentialize.com/diagnosi ... d-bug.html
(with thanks to @e_StrategyPro)

The first early "Heartbleed" test service:
http://filippo.io/Heartbleed
I’d use SSLLabs.com for online, but Filippo Valsorda has a command-line version on Github.
https://github.com/FiloSottile/Heartbleed Ivan Ristic tweeted:
Up to 30% of the servers in the SSL Pulse data set support TLS 1.2. Most of them are probably
vulnerable to the OpenSSL heartbeat bug.

I


The Lastpass Blog
http://blog.lastpass.com/2014/04/lastpa ... d-bug.html


Netcraft:
http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2014/ ... -vulnerabl
e-to-heartbleed-bug.html


Make sure your servers check for revoked certificates!
http://grahamc.com/blog/enable-certificate-revocation/

[TMM]

I just spoke with t GN apparently they do not use open SSL . Have not contacted any other USENET service providers as of yet