Re: HTTPS trust anchors in sysinst

On 2023-08-28 00:07, Taylor R Campbell wrote:
>> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2023 16:06:39 +0200
>> From: Johnny Billquist <[email protected]>
>>
>> Even worse - we are then getting into territory where old releases
>> might accept bad certificates, since they use SSL and have trust
>> anchors and so on. But once those get compromised, these old
>> releases/installers are suddenly not safe anymore.
> 
> This is not worse than the status quo, which is that the old (and
> current!) releases/installers are _already_ not safe from a MITM on
> the network when fetching sets over the network from netbsd.org.

Well. I would argue that it is worse, since this might make people think 
they are safe, while previously it was clearly not the case.

The promise is a (the) difference.

>>> Also, if you're doing public-key crypto - for anything - in the
>>> installers, this will drastically, I am tempted to say
>>> catastrophically, slow down installation on low-end machines, like a
>>> MicroVAX-II or Sun-3.  (Of course, NetBSD might be fine with that.  I
>>> just think it should be at least thought about.)
>>
>> It will be worse than horrible...
> 
> Can you please follow the same instructions I sent to Mouse to help me
> gauge possible performance impacts on the low-end machines you care
> about?
> 
> https://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-install/2023/08/27/msg000700.html

If Mouse don't beat me to it, I'll try to eventually get to it. As far 
as VAXen go, I do har a fairly fast one where I am, but it's still going 
to be slow by todays standard (it's a 4000/90 with 128M of memory). But 
it's usually not up and running.

   Johnny

-- 
Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                   ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: [email protected]             ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol