[PATCH] SSL: don't enable SSLv3 by default
mdounin at mdounin.ru
Fri Oct 31 04:24:26 UTC 2014
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 04:33:09PM -0700, Piotr Sikora wrote:
> Hey Maxim,
> > - SSLv3 is still important from compatibility point of view, there
> > are various clients which doesn't support (or enable by default)
> > anything better;
> But is it, really?
> All major browsers (Chrome , Firefox , IE , Opera ) either
> already disabled SSLv3 or are about to do it.
AFAIK, the only browser already disabled SSLv3 for now is Opera
12, an obsolete Presto-based branch. The links provided suggests
(This is mostly unrelated though, as from nginx point of view it's
the number of clients without anything better than SSLv3 is
> Huge chunk of websites (>42% of Alexa's top 10.000 ) requires at
> least TLSv1.0, including major properties like Facebook, Twitter ,
> Wikipedia  and websites that are using one of the popular CDNs
> (CloudFlare , Akamai , MaxCDN , Fastly ).
The 42% here means, on the other hand, that 58% are still
available via SSLv3, including Google, Youtube, Amazon, Microsoft
and so on. While 42% is a good number, I'm pretty sure the
question is different.
> OpenBSD and LibreSSL disabled SSLv3 by default .
> Furthermore, when we disabled SSLv3 across our network  and gave
> website owners the ability to opt-in back to it... less than 0.001%
> did re-enable it.
And the comments there suggests people have problems with at least
libcurl. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that php scripts
using libcurl with SSLv3 aren't vulnerable to POODLE.
> Hopefully that list is long enough to convince you that SSLv3 is not
> really important... Definitely not important enough to be enabled by
> default, because that's what the commit changes, people can still
> enable SSLv3 in the conf if they really need to.
As previously said, this was alrady discussed excessively and
we decided to preserve the default for now. We'll likely
reconsider the change later.
More information about the nginx-devel