How Many SANs are Insane?

Published: 2022-07-06
Last Updated: 2022-07-06 13:32:19 UTC
by Johannes Ullrich (Version: 1)
0 comment(s)

x509 certificates, as they are used for TLS, can include multiple "Subject Alternative Names" (SANs) to be used with various websites. Experimenting with numerous ways to detect TLS anomalies, I looked at my Zeek x509 logs to summarize how many names are present in certificates.

My Zeek logs are stored in JSON format to make it easier to send them to Elasticsearch. But I also prefer the jq over the zeek native tool zeek-cut (personal preference).

I used this command line to summarize the logs:

zcat x509.log | jq '."san.dns" | length' | sort | uniq -c | sort -n

Based on this methodology, the maximum number of SANs per certificate is close to 500, but most are using 100 hostnames or less.

number of certificates with specific number of SANs

But the real question: What is normal?

It turns out there is no real "hard" limit. The RFCs leave it up to the implementation to define how many SANs to allow [1]. Different certificate authorities implement different limits:

Let's Encrypt [2] , GoDaddy[3]: 100
Comodo[4]: 1,000 (some older references appear to state 2,000 are allowed)

So, in short: it appears that 100 is "safe." For larger numbers, you may run into implementation-specific issues.

]1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5280#section-4.2.1.6
[2] https://letsencrypt.org/docs/rate-limits/
[3] https://www.godaddy.com/web-security/multi-domain-san-ssl-certificat
[4] https://comodosslstore.com/comodo-mdc-ssl.aspx

---
Johannes B. Ullrich, Ph.D. , Dean of Research, SANS.edu
Twitter|

0 comment(s)
ISC Stormcast For Wednesday, July 6th, 2022 https://isc.sans.edu/podcastdetail.html?id=8076

Comments

What's this all about ..?
password reveal .
<a hreaf="https://technolytical.com/">the social network</a> is described as follows because they respect your privacy and keep your data secure:

<a hreaf="https://technolytical.com/">the social network</a> is described as follows because they respect your privacy and keep your data secure. The social networks are not interested in collecting data about you. They don't care about what you're doing, or what you like. They don't want to know who you talk to, or where you go.

<a hreaf="https://technolytical.com/">the social network</a> is not interested in collecting data about you. They don't care about what you're doing, or what you like. They don't want to know who you talk to, or where you go. The social networks only collect the minimum amount of information required for the service that they provide. Your personal information is kept private, and is never shared with other companies without your permission
https://thehomestore.com.pk/
<a hreaf="https://defineprogramming.com/the-public-bathroom-near-me-find-nearest-public-toilet/"> public bathroom near me</a>
<a hreaf="https://defineprogramming.com/the-public-bathroom-near-me-find-nearest-public-toilet/"> nearest public toilet to me</a>
<a hreaf="https://defineprogramming.com/the-public-bathroom-near-me-find-nearest-public-toilet/"> public bathroom near me</a>
<a hreaf="https://defineprogramming.com/the-public-bathroom-near-me-find-nearest-public-toilet/"> public bathroom near me</a>
<a hreaf="https://defineprogramming.com/the-public-bathroom-near-me-find-nearest-public-toilet/"> nearest public toilet to me</a>
<a hreaf="https://defineprogramming.com/the-public-bathroom-near-me-find-nearest-public-toilet/"> public bathroom near me</a>
https://defineprogramming.com/
https://defineprogramming.com/
Enter comment here... a fake TeamViewer page, and that page led to a different type of malware. This week's infection involved a downloaded JavaScript (.js) file that led to Microsoft Installer packages (.msi files) containing other script that used free or open source programs.
distribute malware. Even if the URL listed on the ad shows a legitimate website, subsequent ad traffic can easily lead to a fake page. Different types of malware are distributed in this manner. I've seen IcedID (Bokbot), Gozi/ISFB, and various information stealers distributed through fake software websites that were provided through Google ad traffic. I submitted malicious files from this example to VirusTotal and found a low rate of detection, with some files not showing as malware at all. Additionally, domains associated with this infection frequently change. That might make it hard to detect.
https://clickercounter.org/
Enter corthrthmment here...

Diary Archives