两种方式都是安全的吗？ [英] is ssl secure on both ways?

问题描述

我知道服务器发送的证书不能伪造（仍然存在MD5冲突但仍然是costy）但假冒客户端怎么办..
中间人攻击：
我们不能告诉服务器我们是合法的客户端并从该服务器获取数据操作它然后再用合法的客户端公钥加密它？客户端如何确保数据来自服务器？

I know that certificates that are sent by the server cant be faked (still there is MD5 collisions but costy) but what about faking the client .. in man in the middle attack: cant we tell the server that we are the legitimate client and take data from that server manipulate it then encrypt it again with legitimate client public key ? how does the client be sure that the data came really from the server ?

理论上..我们可以将任何数据注入服务器发送给客户端的响应中吗？ ..

in theory .. can we inject any data into the response sent by the server to the client ?..

推荐答案

您如何验证客户端？ SSL客户端证书？或者某些应用程序级别系统（cookie等）？

How are you authenticating the client? SSL client certificates? Or some application level system (cookies etc)?

以下是SSL的简要说明：

Here's what SSL does in a nutshell:

• 在双方之间协商Diffie-Helmann共享会话密钥


• 服务器是否签署会话密钥并将结果发送给客户端。一旦客户端验证了这一点，客户端就知道没有MITM，服务器就是他们所说的人。


• 如果启用了客户端证书，客户端是否签署会话密钥并发送服务器的签名。服务器现在知道没有MITM，客户端就是他们所说的。


• 使用共享会话密钥加密双向的所有数据

• Negotiates a Diffie-Helmann shared session key between the two parties
• Has the server sign the session key and send the result to the client. Once the client verifies this, the client knows there is no MITM, and the server is who they say they are.
• If client certificates are enabled, has the client sign the session key and send the signature to the server. The server now knows there is no MITM and the client is who they say they are.
• Encrypts all data in both directions using the shared session key

通常，当您使用SSL时，您将不使用客户端证书。严格来说，服务器不知道连接是否是MITM。但是，如果服务器证书不正确，大多数客户端将断开连接。服务器假定如果客户端推进连接，则没有MITM。即使马洛里做MITM，选择不传播与客户的脱节，他现在也没有新的信息;他所做的就是与服务器本身连接。在不截断客户端的会话cookie或其他身份验证信息（仅在验证连接安全后由客户端发送）的情况下，MITM是无用的。

Typically when you use SSL you won't use client certificates. Strictly speaking, the server does not know if the connection is MITM'd. However, most clients will disconnect if the server certificate is bad. The server assumes that if the client pushes forward with the connection, there is no MITM. Even if Mallory, doing the MITM, chooses not to propagate the disconnect from the client, he has no new information now; all he's done is connected to the server himself. Without intercepting the client's session cookie or other authentication information (which is only sent by the client after verifying the connection is secure) the MITM is useless.

所以简而言之，就像只要一端或另一端在启动敏感信息的任何高级别通信之前验证另一端的证书，SSL就是双向安全的。

So in short, as long as one end or the other verifies the certificate of the other end before initiating any high-level communication of sensitive information, SSL is secure in both directions.

这篇关于两种方式都是安全的吗？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！