summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/2d/978e81f30b09cf1fce83d01d30e94526432e92
blob: c0199987c7107ea9cc72ed95e3c0c477b45faa2d (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <luke@dashjr.org>) id 1XFYYf-00006p-1l
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Fri, 08 Aug 2014 01:01:25 +0000
X-ACL-Warn: 
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([192.3.11.21])
	by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	id 1XFYYd-0002ZN-Cp for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Fri, 08 Aug 2014 01:01:24 +0000
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown
	[IPv6:2001:470:5:265:be5f:f4ff:febf:4f76])
	(Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
	by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3AB6010836AE;
	Fri,  8 Aug 2014 00:52:18 +0000 (UTC)
From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
To: slush <slush@centrum.cz>
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 01:01:15 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.15.5-gentoo; KDE/4.12.5; x86_64; ; )
References: <CAPS+U9-ze_-gcYh1WNVJ5h8AZ8owoQX=8OUgNcKnaxgvjxZATA@mail.gmail.com>
	<201408072345.45363.luke@dashjr.org>
	<CAJna-HjzMO68KSXYG++X-8vzQCLurkrAAhfrVo9-AbaoYdqZhw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJna-HjzMO68KSXYG++X-8vzQCLurkrAAhfrVo9-AbaoYdqZhw@mail.gmail.com>
X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F
X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F
X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201408080101.16453.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	-0.7 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
	domain
X-Headers-End: 1XFYYd-0002ZN-Cp
Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
	<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Miners MiTM
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 01:01:25 -0000

On Friday, August 08, 2014 12:29:31 AM slush wrote:
> AFAIK the only protection is SSL + certificate validation on client side.
> However certificate revocation and updates in miners are pain in the ass,
> that's why majority of pools (mine including) don't want to play with
> that...

Certificate validation isn't needed unless the attacker can do a direct MITM 
at connection time, which is a lot harder to maintain than injecting a 
client.reconnect. This, combined with your concern about up to date 
certs/revokes/etc, is why BFGMiner defaults to TLS without cert checking for 
stratum.

Luke