Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml; q=0.9,image/webp,*/*;q=0.8 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_9_4) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/45.0.2454.85 Safari/537.36 Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate, sdch Accept-Language: en-US,en;q=0.8 HTTP Request Header GET POST PUT DELETE …
designed SSL 1.0 which is Never published • 1995, SSL 2.0 and many security flaws founded. • 1996, SSL 3.0 (RFC 6101) and getting popular Transport Layer Security Secure Sockets Layer
designed SSL 1.0 which is Never published • 1995, SSL 2.0 and many security flaws founded. • 1996, SSL 3.0 (RFC 6101) and getting popular • 1999, TLS 1.0 (RFC 2246) as an upgrade of SSL 3.0 (aka SSL 3.1) Transport Layer Security Secure Sockets Layer
designed SSL 1.0 which is Never published • 1995, SSL 2.0 and many security flaws founded. • 1996, SSL 3.0 (RFC 6101) and getting popular • 1999, TLS 1.0 (RFC 2246) as an upgrade of SSL 3.0 (aka SSL 3.1) • 2006, TLS 1.1 (RFC 4346) aka SSL 3.2 Transport Layer Security Secure Sockets Layer
designed SSL 1.0 which is Never published • 1995, SSL 2.0 and many security flaws founded. • 1996, SSL 3.0 (RFC 6101) and getting popular • 1999, TLS 1.0 (RFC 2246) as an upgrade of SSL 3.0 (aka SSL 3.1) • 2006, TLS 1.1 (RFC 4346) aka SSL 3.2 • 2008, TLS 1.2 (RFC 5246) aka SSL 3.3 Transport Layer Security Secure Sockets Layer
designed SSL 1.0 which is Never published • 1995, SSL 2.0 and many security flaws founded. • 1996, SSL 3.0 (RFC 6101) and getting popular • 1999, TLS 1.0 (RFC 2246) as an upgrade of SSL 3.0 (aka SSL 3.1) • 2006, TLS 1.1 (RFC 4346) aka SSL 3.2 • 2008, TLS 1.2 (RFC 5246) aka SSL 3.3 • 2014, SSL 3.0 found vulnerable to POODLE attacks Transport Layer Security Secure Sockets Layer Padding Oracle On Downgraded Legacy Encryption
Client Hello (SSL Version, Session ID, List of Cipher Suites) (SSL Version, Session ID, Selected Cipher, Server Cert) Server Hello Server Certificate Authenticate Server
has been known to be considerably weaker than it was designed to besince at least 2005 — 9 years ago. Collision attacks against SHA-1 are too affordable for us to consider it safe for the public web PKI. We can only expect that attacks will get cheaper.” • Google Security Blog – Gradually sunsetting SHA-1 (Sept 5, 2014) http://googleonlinesecurity.blogspot.tw/2014/09/gradually-sunsetting-sha-1.html • Filippo Valsorda – The Unofficial Chrome SHA-1 Deprecation FAQ https://blog.filippo.io/the-unofficial-chrome-sha1-faq/