Comment on SSH protects the world’s most sensitive networks. It just got a lot weaker

• praise_idleness@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Can’t expect rewrites to be automatically better than what we have now. We have so many replacement for Clang…

  source
• originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  In what way have the fundamental assumptions of SSH changed?

  source

  • eager_eagle@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    SSH carries design choices from the 90s that might not apply today.

    But it’s the paper authors themselves who are talking about a redesign, not a random Lemmy user, so idk.

    source

    • princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      If you read the other article linked, there are literally already fixes available for many ssh implementations. Doesn’t seem that disruptive to me…

      source
    • originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      We went from “the fundamentals have changed” to “the 90s were a long time ago” real fast. Regardless of who made the point initially you are arguing it. Full redesigns are expensive, inefficient, and likely to introduce new vulnerabilities. The existing implementation is refined by decades of real world use. We can incorporate new lessons without a full redesign - if we can’t then we should stop being software engineers.

      A full redesign is usually the type of project a CTO I worked for called “computer science projects.”

      source