On 02/22/2015 02:05 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2015-02-22 01:27:54 +0100, Emil Lenngren wrote:
>> I honestly wonder why postgres uses renegotiation at all. The motivation
>> that cryptoanalysis is easier as more data is sent seems quite
>> far-fetched.
>
> I don't think so. There's a fair number of algorithms that can/could be
> much easier be attached with lots of data available. Especially if you
> can guess/know/control some of the data. Additionally renegotiating
> regularly helps to constrain a possible key leagage to a certain amount
> of time. With backend connections often being alive for weeks at a time
> that's not a bad thing.
Renegotiation will be removed from future TLS versions because it is
considered unnecessary with modern ciphers:
<https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/issues/38>
If ciphers require rekeying, that mechanism will be provided at the TLS
layer in the future.
I think you could remove renegotiation from PostgreSQL as long as you
offer something better than RC4 in the TLS handshake.
--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security
