Re: Cahoot
Adrian Midgley <[email protected]> Wed, 06 May 2015 19:36:38 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.law.cryptography.uk |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAN2jWyjw=JVFhuDg4tz_J04AmQLOKtf0oKB0HKcBQV3N34TFFQ@mail.gmail.com> |
TLS 1.0 is a bit obsolete and breakable I think. It isn't any riskier than last month, but is more risky than the year before last, is how I read it. The pictures don't really need encrypting, I think, but the bank should upgrade its secure layer. On Wed, 6 May 2015 at 17:42 Francis Davey <[email protected]> wrote: > My apologies if this is a stupid question, but someone might be able to > give me some perspective. > > If I navigate to https://www.cahoot.com, Chrome seems less than happy. It > complains about the cryptographic technology being obsolete and also that > the site does not possess a public key certificate (if I am interpreting > correctly). The icon it displays suggests a fairly qualified acceptance of > the site. > > If I then click on the log in button I am sent to securebank.cahoot.com > for which Chrome has other (but slightly different) complaints. Also: in > the process a window very briefly appears and then vanishes again (which is > always unsettling). > > Is it safe for me to go forward and enter my security details to access my > account, or should I contact the bank and ask them to fix it (or rather to > wait in their customer service queue to be told "no" after much > incomprehension I suspect). > > Thoughts? I am keen not to have my bank account hacked. > > > -- > Francis Davey > >