Google might shun Dutch gov certificates from DigiNotar

Chrome update prepared to kill 2 certs


Updated In the wake of hundreds of fraudulent secure sockets layer certificates issued by DigiNotar, Google developers are preparing a version of the Chrome browser that rejects some web credentials sanctioned by the Dutch government's official certificate authority.

Source code posted Thursday afternoon California time on Google's own website would prevent Chrome from trusting any secure website signed by DigiNotar under an official program set up by the Dutch government. It was set up under the auspices of PKIoverheid, the official certificate authority of the Netherlands.

After this article was first published, Mozilla developers implemented a similar change that will cause users to receive a warning when they encounter PKIoverheid certificates signed by DigiNotar. It's unclear when the changes will take effect in Firefox, Thunderbird or SeaMonkey. Mozilla representatives didn't respond to an email request comment.

Shortly after Monday's discovery that DigiNotar had issued a fraudulent google.com certificate that was used to spy on people in Iran who accessed Gmail, Google, Mozilla, and Microsoft updated their software so it would no longer trust the Netherlands-based certificate authority. What Google and Mozilla, and possibly Microsoft as well, never said in their advisories was that their browsers and email applications would continue to trust two DigiNotar certificates that were linked to PKIoverheid.

All three software makers have ducked questions for three days, but a handful of web-based discussions show members of some of them arguing that the PKIoverheid-signed intermediate certificates can still be trusted. On Friday, around the same time this article was first published, Google issued its first on-the-record comment indicating the blocking of the DigiNotar-issued PKIoverheid certificates was under active discussion.

"We're currently evaluating a number of factors, and we want to be prepared to act if we need to," a spokesman wrote in an email. "Our top priority is to protect the privacy and security of our users. To be clear, in this instance we are considering a CA operated by DigiNotar, not the Staat de Nederlanden root CA. We encourage DigiNotar to provide a complete analysis of the situation."

It's unclear if or when Google intends to implement the planned changes. A few hours after the Chromium differential was posted publicly, access to it became restricted. A volunteer Chromium developer said the source code was a sign that at least some people inside Google may have reservations.

“The fact that Google is taking this preparatory step may be anticipating the worst,” said Ryan Sleevi, a who has contributed code to the Chromium project in the past. “It also seems to suggest that they may have information that PKIoverheid has been compromised or otherwise is untrustworthy through its link to Diginotar. PKIoverheid doesn't appear to have done anything wrong other than associating with DigiNotar.”

It's unclear how many website certificates might be affected by the move, but the number and profile of sites that use DigiNotar's PKIoverheid certificate could be considerably higher than those that rely on DigiNotar's root certificate alone. The site at https://www.nicugehoorscreening.nl appears to offer neonatal intensive care unit services from the Dutch government.

It appears as a valid SSL site under Google Chrome. If the changes under consideration are made, the browser would return an error that it's not to be trusted.

On Thursday, Mozilla Vice President of Technical Strategy Mike Shaver issued a series of tweets that appeared to indicate developers of the Firefox browser and Thunderbird email client were inclined to continue trusting the intermediate certificates. Responding to one Twitter dispatch asking what in one of the excepted certificates suggested it wasn't controlled by DigiNotar, Shaver offered the following response:

“nothing in the cert does. our conversations with the dutch authorities do. it doesn't chain to digitar *root*, right?”

A separate tweet posted Wednesday by Google security researcher Adam Langley said: “PKIoverheid is still allowed for now based on assurances from the Dutch government. Conversation still ongoing.”

Microsoft declined to say whether changes it has made to the Vista and later operating systems block the two PKIoverheid certificates signed by DigiNotar.

The relevant code in the version of Chromium is as follows:

Index: net/base/x509_certificate.cc
diff --git a/net/base/x509_certificate.cc b/net/base/x509_certificate.cc
index e96ece490ad4c32fafb735671317dae35115151e..36b0ed2bfcbf315595eb779922026c954db7d5b9 100644
--- a/net/base/x509_certificate.cc
+++ b/net/base/x509_certificate.cc
@@ -957,7 +957,7 @@ bool X509Certificate::IsBlacklisted() const {
 // static
 bool X509Certificate::IsPublicKeyBlacklisted(
     const std::vector<SHA1Fingerprint>& public_key_hashes) {
-  static const unsigned kNumHashes = 3;
+  static const unsigned kNumHashes = 5;
   static const uint8 kHashes[kNumHashes][base::SHA1_LENGTH] = {
     // Subject: CN=DigiNotar Root CA
     // Issuer: CN=Entrust.net x2 and self-signed
@@ -971,6 +971,14 @@ bool X509Certificate::IsPublicKeyBlacklisted(
     // Issuer: CN=Entrust.net
     {0xe2, 0x3b, 0x8d, 0x10, 0x5f, 0x87, 0x71, 0x0a, 0x68, 0xd9,
      0x24, 0x80, 0x50, 0xeb, 0xef, 0xc6, 0x27, 0xbe, 0x4c, 0xa6},
+    // Subject: CN=DigiNotar PKIoverheid CA Organisatie - G2
+    // Issuer: CN=Staat der Nederlanden Organisatie CA - G2
+    {0x7b, 0x2e, 0x16, 0xbc, 0x39, 0xbc, 0xd7, 0x2b, 0x45, 0x6e,
+     0x9f, 0x05, 0x5d, 0x1d, 0xe6, 0x15, 0xb7, 0x49, 0x45, 0xdb},
+    // Subject: CN=DigiNotar PKIoverheid CA Overheid en Bedrijven
+    // Issuer: CN=Staat der Nederlanden Overheid CA
+    {0xe8, 0xf9, 0x12, 0x00, 0xc6, 0x5c, 0xee, 0x16, 0xe0, 0x39,
+     0xb9, 0xf8, 0x83, 0x84, 0x16, 0x61, 0x63, 0x5f, 0x81, 0xc5},
   };
 
   for (unsigned i = 0; i < kNumHashes; i++) {

It clearly shows two additional DigiNotar certificates, including their serial numbers, that would be blocked if the changes go into effect.

Asked why the source code was originally accessible to everyone and later was restricted, a Google spokesman said: “Code diffs may be private before they are committed. Commits to the tree will of course be public.”


Other stories you might like

  • Cisco warns of security holes in its security appliances
    Bugs potentially useful for rogue insiders, admin account hijackers

    Cisco has alerted customers to another four vulnerabilities in its products, including a high-severity flaw in its email and web security appliances. 

    The networking giant has issued a patch for that bug, tracked as CVE-2022-20664. The flaw is present in the web management interface of Cisco's Secure Email and Web Manager and Email Security Appliance in both the virtual and hardware appliances. Some earlier versions of both products, we note, have reached end of life, and so the manufacturer won't release fixes; it instead told customers to migrate to a newer version and dump the old.

    This bug received a 7.7 out of 10 CVSS severity score, and Cisco noted that its security team is not aware of any in-the-wild exploitation, so far. That said, given the speed of reverse engineering, that day is likely to come. 

    Continue reading
  • Google has more reasons why it doesn't like antitrust law that affects Google
    It'll ruin Gmail, claims web ads giant

    Google has a fresh list of reasons why it opposes tech antitrust legislation making its way through Congress but, like others who've expressed discontent, the ad giant's complaints leave out mention of portions of the proposed law that address said gripes.

    The law bill in question is S.2992, the Senate version of the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA), which is closer than ever to getting votes in the House and Senate, which could see it advanced to President Biden's desk.

    AICOA prohibits tech companies above a certain size from favoring their own products and services over their competitors. It applies to businesses considered "critical trading partners," meaning the company controls access to a platform through which business users reach their customers. Google, Apple, Amazon, and Meta in one way or another seemingly fall under the scope of this US legislation. 

    Continue reading
  • Google, EFF back Cloudflare in row over pirate streams
    Ban akin to 'ordering a telephone company to prevent a person from having conversations' over its lines

    Google, EFF, and the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) have filed court documents supporting Cloudflare after it was sued for refusing to block a streaming site.

    Earlier this year, a handful of Israel-based media companies took Israel.tv to court, accusing it of streaming TV and movie content it had no right to distribute. The corporations — United King Film Distribution, D.B.S. Satellite Services, HOT Communication Systems, Charlton, Reshet Media and Keshet Broadcasting — won the lawsuit after Israel.tv's creators failed to show up to their hearings, and the judge ordered Israel-tv.com, Israel.tv and Sdarot.tv each pay $7,650,000 in damages. 

    In a more surprising move, however, the media outfits also won an injunction [PDF] in the United States in April against a slew of internet companies, among others, banning them from aiding Israel.tv in its piracy.

    Continue reading
  • World Economic Forum wants a global map of online crime
    Will cyber crimes shrug off Atlas Initiative? Objectively, yes

    RSA Conference An ambitious project spearheaded by the World Economic Forum (WEF) is working to develop a map of the cybercrime ecosystem using open source information.

    The Atlas initiative, whose contributors include Fortinet and Microsoft and other private-sector firms, involves mapping the relationships between criminal groups and their infrastructure with the end goal of helping both industry and the public sector — law enforcement and government agencies — disrupt these nefarious ecosystems.  

    This kind of visibility into the connections between the gang members can help security researchers identify vulnerabilities in the criminals' supply chain to develop better mitigation strategies and security controls for their customers. 

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022