Linux - SecurityThis forum is for all security related questions.
Questions, tips, system compromises, firewalls, etc. are all included here.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
you can't prevent it! That's nuts! It's critical information for the client negotiating with you to have. Why on earth would you want to stop this information being available in the first place? Wy do you think it's a risk? AES256 with SHA? That's tough stuff. And SSL_NOT_EXP means "non-export grade SSL ciphers", i.e. "good SSL ciphers"
What is the supporting text with this report? Did you, or your management superiors, read it?
Last edited by acid_kewpie; 04-03-2013 at 03:12 PM.
Thank you acid_kewpie for your response.
We are using McAfee's Vulnerability manager and were trying to bring down the number of reports such as the above we are seeing. I didn't know the client needed this information to use for authentication.
Last edited by legolasthehansy; 04-03-2013 at 04:19 PM.
but is it actually being framed in a negative light in any way by this security service? As much as it's restrictive having a single cipher only, it's a very secure one. There is no perspective of risk in any way at all as I'm reading this. It's like saying you don't want to open your firewall to the internet for security reasons, but still want to run a website.
Last edited by acid_kewpie; 04-04-2013 at 02:04 AM.
It is information only and not being flagged as a vulnerability. This shouldn't be shown up in the first place so we'll talk to McAfee and get their input on what they think. I'm closing this thread as solved.