Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | jitbug's commentslogin

It must have been many many years ago, more than 10 at least.

Any way to avoid or bypass name or path constraints would be considered a huge and monumental vulnerability today.


> It must have been many many years ago, more than 10 at least.

You would be unduly optimistic — for example, Apple did not support them at least as recently as 2015 (see e.g. https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=407093...) and 10 years ago OpenSSL hadn't even shipped support upstream, plus however long it took your distribution to ship a major version upgrade to 1.0.

I was hoping someone might have a pointer to current information on that topic since I believe Apple did finally fix Secure Transport but not when.


I am afraid I don't have better information on when but some anecdotal information about the state of it. I have done some limited testing and research for our own internal Root CA I got the impression it works nowadays.

I have not gotten as far as testing it in production but based on testing Safari and Chrome in https://nameconstraints.bettertls.com/ and creating our own name constrained cert and testing it with both OS X Curl and Linux Curl (OpenSSL) I am still of the impression it works.

Most other people seem to be sure that it does not though (for example in this discussion and here https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/95600/are-x-509...) so I am not sure if I missed something or if people are just not up to date.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: