Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CRLSet component to check revoke status of certificates #2719

Open
1 task
brokoler opened this issue Feb 16, 2024 · 11 comments
Open
1 task

CRLSet component to check revoke status of certificates #2719

brokoler opened this issue Feb 16, 2024 · 11 comments
Labels
discussion Not actionable yet; need community feedback enhancement help wanted

Comments

@brokoler
Copy link

Description

CRLSet component to check revoke status of certificates

Who's implementing?

  • I'm willing to implement this feature myself

The problem

CRLSet is excluded from Ungoogled Chromium, since it contacts Google Servers.

Still this feature is important for security to check the status of website and CA certificates.
With the component removed MITM attacks are possible and could happen at all, since the browser never is informed of a certificate revocation.

Possible solutions

Multiple solutions would be possible:

  • Add the component per default and add a configutation toggle to browser settings to enable/disable (default setting: disable)
  • Don't add it at all and inform the user how it can be installed by the user (Question: Would it be enough to move the CRLSet component of a Chrome installation to the UserData folder, similar to installing Widevine?)

Alternatives

No response

Additional context

No response

@PF4Public
Copy link
Contributor

With the component removed MITM attacks are possible and could happen at all

Is it more harmful than not having EV certificates and a green padlock? "possible" and "can happen" are not the best terms for describing security concerns. What are the real security issues that do exist? CLR issue does happen after a server operator knows that the key is compromised and took action in this regard. MITM attack "is possible and can happen" even without server administrator noticing anything.

Copy link

This issue has been automatically marked as stale as there has been no recent activity in response to our request for more information. Please respond so that we can proceed with this issue.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label Mar 29, 2024
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Apr 5, 2024

This issue has been automatically closed as sufficient information hasn't been provided on the issue for further actions to be taken. Feel free to add more information.

@github-actions github-actions bot closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Apr 5, 2024
@rany2
Copy link
Member

rany2 commented Apr 5, 2024

@PF4Public This actually seems important, Chromium doesn't fallback to CRL and OCSP doesn't work well (or at all) for most CAs.

Firefox already has OneCRL so it's actually a common practice for most browsers these days to centralize all the CRLs. I assume this is done for performance.

Basically right now, the primary way certificates are revoked by CAs just doesn't work.

@PF4Public
Copy link
Contributor

@Ahrotahn @networkException @Eloston @teeminus @Nifury Does this issue deserve to be reopened and reconsidered?

@networkException
Copy link
Member

as an optional feature sure, no hard opinion

@teeminus
Copy link
Contributor

teeminus commented Apr 6, 2024

as an optional feature sure, no hard opinion

Same

@Nifury
Copy link
Member

Nifury commented Apr 7, 2024

as an optional feature sure, no hard opinion

Sure, but one could also argue that other security features, such as the built-in virus scan or even auto-update (fixing critical vulnerabilities), are necessary using the very same reason.

I'm leaning toward getting a Chrome extension to check for revocation, but I can't find any :(

@rany2
Copy link
Member

rany2 commented Apr 7, 2024

as an optional feature sure, no hard opinion

How so? This makes it so that CAs can't revoke bad certificates. There is no OCSP/CRL fallback, it's completely broken.

@Ahrotahn
Copy link
Contributor

Ahrotahn commented Apr 8, 2024

I think it's fine to reopen this issue, but I don't know if there is an easy solution. We'd have to carve out an exception in the domain substitution for the component updater and get that working somehow. As an alternative, maybe it's possible to hook into the CRLSet updater to look in a specified location so end users could use something like crlset-tools to manually download updates.

@rany2
Copy link
Member

rany2 commented Apr 8, 2024

Alternatively we can see if we could have OCSP/CRL working properly, this wouldn't be an issue if that was working properly.

@PF4Public PF4Public added discussion Not actionable yet; need community feedback and removed need info Need feedback to proceed Stale labels Apr 8, 2024
@PF4Public PF4Public reopened this Apr 8, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
discussion Not actionable yet; need community feedback enhancement help wanted
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants