[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Root password strength



jeremy ardley wrote: 
> 
> On 20/3/24 19:03, Michael Kjörling wrote:
> > On 20 Mar 2024 15:46 +0800, fromjeremy.ardley@gmail.com  (jeremy ardley):
> > > [users are locked out from uploading their public key using ssh-copy-id]
> > So the private keys aren't private, thereby invalidating a lot of
> > assumptions inherent in public key cryptography.
> > 
> > Also, are you saying that you do not let users rotate their keys
> > themselves; and if so, why on Earth not?
> 
> 
> Private keys aren't private in any corporate network. Security management
> would be impossible to manage if users could generate their own keys and
> install them on any server. For one thing users do not have any easy way to
> revoke certificates.

No. Users create public/private keypairs, keep the private one
private and send you the public side to install on servers. A
user can revoke their own access by deleting the private one;
a sysadmin can revoke a user's access by deleting the public one
from each host that it's installed on.

For ssh, the sysadmin can also add/remove users from the
AllowUsers list in the sshd config, or add them to the DenyUsers
list, or remove their membership in an AllowGroups list.

Proponents of certificates are going to say "but this is harder
than adding their cert to the CRL", which is nominally true but
in practice, you most likely already have a distribution mechanism
for maintaining system configuration everywhere.

> In any serious network, private keys are simply a name for a secret key
> issued by an administrator to a user. Matching public keys are often
> published and are maintained by the administrator. Both keys are owned by
> the administrators.

This is incorrect, as Michael and others have stated.
 
> If you are in full control of your network and resources, sure, go ahead and
> rotate your keys. But if you are in a network run by others you have to
> accept their control of keys and access to resources.

No, you have to accept their control of access to their resources.

-dsr-


Reply to: