Validation flaw addressed in version 2.14

"Rony Shapiro" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.security.passwordsafe.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi,

The good folks at elcomsoft have posted an item regarding a flaw in the
passphrase validation for all versions of PasswordSafe.
(http://seclists.org/lists/vulnwatch/2005/Oct-Dec/0046.html)

Briefly, it's possible to take advantage of the database structure to bypass
the deliberately slow "key stretching" method used to verify the user's
passphrase, enabling a faster brute-force dictionary attack than was
intended by the designers.

In release 2.14, I've implemented a partial fix to this, basically replacing
fixed data with randomness wherever possible in the first block. This is a
partial fix, but it's the most I can do without breaking backwards
compatability with existing implementations (and it seems that I've already
broken compatability with the Java version...).

I'd like to ask this list for suggestions for (1) a better solution that
would keep compatability with previous versions (that is, that previous
versions 2.x of PasswordSafe will be able to read the new database, and (2)
a complete solution, unencumbered by backwards-compatability (that is, a new
version of the database format).

Thanks to Jeff & Hagai for bringing the vulnwatch posting to my attention.

	Cheers,

		Rony

P.S. - I've decided not to announce this to the user's mailing list for two
reasons: 1. The issue is a bit subtle and therefore difficult to explain.
Conversely, it's *very* easy to misunderstand as "passwordsafe's security
is/was broken". 2. The fix isn't a complete solution to the problem (yet).
Of course, 




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.