DOCSLIB.ORG

Encrypted TLS/SSL Handshake

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Encrypted TLS/SSL Handshake Masking Host Identity on Internet: Encrypted TLS/SSL Handshake Vinod S. Khandkar and Manjesh K. Hanawal Industrial Engineering and Operations Research Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India fvinod.khandkar, [email protected] Abstract—Network middle-boxes often classify the traffic flows “Domain name Service” (DNS) database associated with the on the Internet to perform traffic management or discriminate network address is also a primary source of revealing traffic one traffic against the other. As the widespread adoption of flow identity. However, with the adoption of “DNS over TLS” HTTPS protocol has made it difficult to classify the traffic looking into the content field, one of the fields the middle-boxes look for is [3] techniques, the DNS information is encrypted over the Server Name Indicator (SNI), which goes in plain text. SNI field Internet. That means it is not readily available to network contains information about the host and can, in turn, reveal the middle-boxes for traffic flow identification. That leads to the type of traffic. This paper presents a method to mask the server SNI based traffic stream identification [4] as a widely used host identity by encrypting the SNI. We develop a simple method technique over the Internet. that completes the SSL/TLS connection establishment over two handshakes - the first handshake establishes a secure channel without sharing SNI information, and the second handshake shares the encrypted SNI. Our method makes it mandatory for fronting servers to always accept the handshake request without the SNI and respond with a valid SSL certificate. As there is no modification in already proven SSL/TLS encryption mechanism and processing of handshake messages, the new method enjoys all security benefits of existing secure channel establishment and needs no modification in existing routers/middle-boxes. Using customized client-server over the live Internet, we demonstrate the feasibility of our method. Moreover, the impact analysis shows that the method adheres to almost all SSL/TLS related Internet standards requirements. Index Terms—TLS, SSL, SNI I. INTRODUCTION Fig. 1. SNI based traffic shaping illustrated using commercial traffic shaper The advent of modern content delivery techniques has The network middle-boxes can manipulate throughput of increased Internet traffic many folds over the last decade. traffic streams with the correctly identifiable class or server As more users rely on Internet services, data privacy, and host-name. Often, the identification is made based on SNI anonymity over the Internet have become crucial. This need information. Fig. 1 illustrates SNI based traffic shaping using prompted the rise of secured or encrypted data communication commercial traffic shaper. We use a commercial traffic shaper using HTTPS protocol [1]. These days, most of the Internet to throttle throughput of a video stream to 1 Mbps. When services use the HTTPS protocol for providing data anonymity the video stream access mechanism uses the correct SNI, the arXiv:2101.04556v1 [cs.CR] 12 Jan 2021 and security. traffic shaper successfully limits the throughput to 1 Mbps While HTTPS protocol secures the channel content, it also (green curve). When the same video access mechanism does makes the traffic stream unidentifiable by network middle- not use any SNI information or uses non-comprehensible SNI, boxes. It has restricted Internet Service Providers’ (ISPs) with everything else remaining the same, the stream gets ability to efficiently classify the traffic streams that would help throughput of 2:5 Mbps based on bandwidth availability (blue them perform legitimate tasks like traffic management or apply curve). It illustrates that the commercial traffic shaper could discriminatory policies like selective throttling and preferential correctly identify and throttle the video stream in the presence treatment of specific traffic streams. Thus, it has prompted of correct SNI information. In the latter case, it could not ISPs to employ various other techniques to classify traffic [2]. classify the stream and hence did not throttled the throughput. The “Server Name Identification” (SNI) based technique is It validates our claim that the SNI field is essential for the one such commonly used technique. It uses the SNI field middle-boxes/traffic-shapers to correctly classify the traffic in the Transport Layer Security (TLS) handshake protocol streams and apply any traffic management or throttling. message to identify the traffic flow. It is an optional parameter Even though ISP middle-boxes’ service identification and sent as a plain-text in the initial SSL/TLS handshake. The classification aid efficient traffic management, it also gives far more control over the handling of packets related to specific A standardization body acknowledges the need for en- services within the network. The ISP middle-boxes often use crypted SNI (E-SNI) with the related issues and requirements such control to provide higher performance to certain services well documented in the internet-draft [9]. It lists unanticipated while degrading certain services’ performances. There are usage of SNI that includes ISP QoS profiling based on SNI. reports of preferential treatment cases in the past, e.g., Netflix The various E-SNI requirements are categorized as attack v/s Comcast, that prompted various regulating authorities to prevention, fronting server related, and other security consider- advocate net-neutrality. The net-neutrality is related to ‘equal’ ations. The E-SNI is still not available as an Internet standard, treatment of all packets over the Internet. but the internet-draft in an experimental version is available This paper proposes a method to send SNI in a non-plain- [10]. It proposes to encrypt the entire “clientHello” message. text format that prevents the middle-boxes from using it to A slightly different version of it is already implemented identify the traffic class or server host-name. Thus, it paves and commercialized by “Cloudflare” [11] that encrypts only the way for more comprehensive and non-malicious ways of the SNI portion of the “clientHello” message. It uses the managing traffic over the Internet. It will also help prevent Diffie-Hellman key exchange algorithm to generate a shared malicious users from knowing the type of activity performed encryption key over an untrusted channel. This method’s main by users while using public networks through wire-tapping. It drawback is that it requires a considerable amount of pre- applies to all versions of TLS supporting SNI parameter. Our handshake processing and requires the client and server to contributions can be summarized as follows: exchange the public portion of the generated symmetric key to • We develop a method to mask SNI which conceals host’s encrypt and decrypt SNI. This requirement raises the security identity which in turn prevents classification of traffic issues that need mitigation using persistent security credential streams on the Internet modifications. • We validate our method works without requiring any The authors in [12] propose a method of domain fronting changes in the existing routers/middle-boxes by estab- in which the fronting server establishes a secure connection lishing a secure connection between a server-client pair with the client using its server name. Later this connection is over the Internet. extended to the intended content server by establishing another The paper is organized as follows: Section II describes HTTPS tunnel within already established HTTPS tunnel. The the background technologies associated with the proposed major drawback of this method is the increased workload of methodology. Section III describes the design principles fol- double encryption. lowed and the proposed method. Section IV explains modi- Our SNI encryption method is different from the above fication to the existing the TLS handshake to send SNI on methods as it not only encrypts the SNI but performs the entire a secure channel. Section V discusses impacts of various SSL handshake for appropriate SNI within a secured channel. design choices and validates the feasibility of our methods It not only hides SNI from middle-boxes but also the plain- through its implementation on live Internet. The advantages text server certificate. It is thus making the entire SSL/TLS and disadvantages of the proposed method are discussed in handshake in question transparent to network middle-boxes. Section VI with a conclusion in Section VII II. BACKGROUND A. Related Work The method proposed in this paper deals with SNI and Three revisions of TLS protocol have been made since SSL/TLS handshake, along with its operation in various client- its introduction as an improved SSL protocol. The latest server configurations. This section describes these aspects as TLS version is 1.3. It was introduced in 2018. Apart from defined in the standard and deployed in practice. the major TLS/SSL releases, there have been many protocol and parameter related modifications proposed until now. The A. SNI in TLS possibility of improving the basic RSA algorithm’s speed is SNI is an optional field in the “clientHello” message sent investigated using the EAMRSA algorithm in [5]. [6] proposes from the client. This message is part of the initial handshake the new key negotiation mechanism that is ISAKMP based. of the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol [13]. IETF Integrating ISAKMP in SSL brings notably new authentication standardized the TLS protocol by taking Secured Socket Layer methods, identity protection, and fast algorithm negotiations. (SSL) as a seed protocol. As of today, it is the most widely The attempt to encrypt/decrypt SSL/TLS handshake parameter deployed protocol for establishing a secure channel. “HTTP is done in [7]. It proposes the Combined Symmetric Key over TLS” or HTTPS standard has adopted the TLS protocol (CSK) based SSL handshake that uses CSK technology to in which the TLS provides channel-oriented security to already authenticate both communication sides and uses the symmetric defined plain-text HTTP protocol. key to encrypt and decrypt secret information, i.e., server The handshake protocol of TLS consists of a “clientHello” authentication code.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SSL/TLS Implementation CIO-IT Security-14-69
    DocuSign Envelope ID: BE043513-5C38-4412-A2D5-93679CF7A69A IT Security Procedural Guide: SSL/TLS Implementation CIO-IT Security-14-69 Revision 6 April 6, 2021 Office of the Chief Information Security Officer DocuSign Envelope ID: BE043513-5C38-4412-A2D5-93679CF7A69A CIO-IT Security-14-69, Revision 6 SSL/TLS Implementation VERSION HISTORY/CHANGE RECORD Person Page Change Posting Change Reason for Change Number of Number Change Change Initial Version – December 24, 2014 N/A ISE New guide created Revision 1 – March 15, 2016 1 Salamon Administrative updates to Clarify relationship between this 2-4 align/reference to the current guide and CIO-IT Security-09-43 version of the GSA IT Security Policy and to CIO-IT Security-09-43, IT Security Procedural Guide: Key Management 2 Berlas / Updated recommendation for Clarification of requirements 7 Salamon obtaining and using certificates 3 Salamon Integrated with OMB M-15-13 and New OMB Policy 9 related TLS implementation guidance 4 Berlas / Updates to clarify TLS protocol Clarification of guidance 11-12 Salamon recommendations 5 Berlas / Updated based on stakeholder Stakeholder review / input Throughout Salamon review / input 6 Klemens/ Formatting, editing, review revisions Update to current format and Throughout Cozart- style Ramos Revision 2 – October 11, 2016 1 Berlas / Allow use of TLS 1.0 for certain Clarification of guidance Throughout Salamon server through June 2018 Revision 3 – April 30, 2018 1 Berlas / Remove RSA ciphers from approved ROBOT vulnerability affected 4-6 Salamon cipher stack
    [Show full text]
  • Poster: Introducing Massbrowser: a Censorship Circumvention System Run by the Masses
    Poster: Introducing MassBrowser: A Censorship Circumvention System Run by the Masses Milad Nasr∗, Anonymous∗, and Amir Houmansadr University of Massachusetts Amherst fmilad,[email protected] ∗Equal contribution Abstract—We will present a new censorship circumvention sys- side the censorship regions, which relay the Internet traffic tem, currently being developed in our group. The new system of the censored users. This includes systems like Tor, VPNs, is called MassBrowser, and combines several techniques from Psiphon, etc. Unfortunately, such circumvention systems are state-of-the-art censorship studies to design a hard-to-block, easily blocked by the censors by enumerating their limited practical censorship circumvention system. MassBrowser is a set of proxy server IP addresses [14]. (2) Costly to operate: one-hop proxy system where the proxies are volunteer Internet To resist proxy blocking by the censors, recent circumven- users in the free world. The power of MassBrowser comes from tion systems have started to deploy the proxies on shared-IP the large number of volunteer proxies who frequently change platforms such as CDNs, App Engines, and Cloud Storage, their IP addresses as the volunteer users move to different a technique broadly referred to as domain fronting [3]. networks. To get a large number of volunteer proxies, we This mechanism, however, is prohibitively expensive [11] provide the volunteers the control over how their computers to operate for large scales of users. (3) Poor QoS: Proxy- are used by the censored users. Particularly, the volunteer based circumvention systems like Tor and it’s variants suffer users can decide what websites they will proxy for censored from low quality of service (e.g., high latencies and low users, and how much bandwidth they will allocate.
    [Show full text]
  • Configuring SSL for Services and Servers
    Barracuda Web Application Firewall Configuring SSL for Services and Servers https://campus.barracuda.com/doc/4259877/ Configuring SSL for SSL Enabled Services You can configure SSL encryption for data transmitted between the client and the service. In the BASIC > Services page, click Edit next to a listed service and configure the following fields: Status – Set to On to enable SSL on your service. Status defaults to On for a newly created SSL enabled service. Certificate – Select a certificate presented to the browser when accessing the service. Note that only RSA certificates are listed here. If you have not created the certificate, select Generate Certificate from the drop-down list to generate a self-signed certificate. For more information on how to create self- signed certificates, see Creating a Client Certificate. If you want to upload a self-signed certificate, select Upload Certificate from the drop- down list. Provide the details about the certificate in the Upload Certificate dialog box. For information on how to upload a certificate, see Adding an SSL Certificate. Select ECDSA Certificate – Select an ECDSA certificate presented to the browser when accessing the service. SSL/TLS Quick Settings - Select an option to automatically configure the SSL/TLS protocols and ciphers. Use Configured Values - This option allows you to use the previously saved values. If the values are not saved, the Factory Preset option can be used. Factory Preset - This option allows you to enable TLS 1.1, TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 protocols without configuring override ciphers. Mozilla Intermediate Compatibility (Default, Recommended) - This configuration is a recommended configuration when you want to enable TLS 1.2 and TLS 1.3 and configure override ciphers for the same.
    [Show full text]
  • Threat Modeling and Circumvention of Internet Censorship by David Fifield
    Threat modeling and circumvention of Internet censorship By David Fifield A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor J.D. Tygar, Chair Professor Deirdre Mulligan Professor Vern Paxson Fall 2017 1 Abstract Threat modeling and circumvention of Internet censorship by David Fifield Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science University of California, Berkeley Professor J.D. Tygar, Chair Research on Internet censorship is hampered by poor models of censor behavior. Censor models guide the development of circumvention systems, so it is important to get them right. A censor model should be understood not just as a set of capabilities|such as the ability to monitor network traffic—but as a set of priorities constrained by resource limitations. My research addresses the twin themes of modeling and circumvention. With a grounding in empirical research, I build up an abstract model of the circumvention problem and examine how to adapt it to concrete censorship challenges. I describe the results of experiments on censors that probe their strengths and weaknesses; specifically, on the subject of active probing to discover proxy servers, and on delays in their reaction to changes in circumvention. I present two circumvention designs: domain fronting, which derives its resistance to blocking from the censor's reluctance to block other useful services; and Snowflake, based on quickly changing peer-to-peer proxy servers. I hope to change the perception that the circumvention problem is a cat-and-mouse game that affords only incremental and temporary advancements.
    [Show full text]
  • Hosting Multiple Certs on One IP
    Hosting multiple SSL Certicates on a single IP S Solving the IPv4 shortage dilemma FULL COMPATIBILITY When it comes to SSL security, hosting companies are increasingly facing In public environments, using SNI alone would mean cutting access to a issues related to IP addresses scarcity. Today every digital certificate used large number of potential site visitors as around 15% of systems (as of to provide an SSL connection on a webserver needs a dedicated IP January 2013) are incompatible with SNI. address, making it difficult for hosting companies to respond to increas- ing demand for security. The true solution GlobalSign has developed a solution to address hosting companies’ operational limitations and to let them run multiple certificates on a By coupling the Server Name Indication technology with SSL Certificates single IP address, at no detriment to browser and operating system and a CloudSSL Certificate from GlobalSign, multiple certificates can compatibility. now be hosted on a single IP without losing potential visitors that might lack SNI support. Host Headers GlobalSign SSL Certificates can be installed on several name-based virtual hosts as per any SNI-based https website. Each website has its To address the current concern of shortage of IPv4 addresses, most own certificate, allowing for even the highest levels of security (such as websites have been configured as name-based virtual hosts for years. Extended Validation Certificates). When several websites share the same IP number, the server will select the website to display based on the name provided in the Host Header. GlobalSign will then provide a free fall-back CloudSSL certificate for legacy configurations, enabling the 15% of visitors that do not have SNI Unfortunately this doesn’t allow for SSL security as the SSL handshake compatibility to access the secure websites on that IP address.
    [Show full text]
  • Perception Financial Services Cyber Threat Briefing Report
    PERCEPTION FINANCIAL SERVICES CYBER THREAT BRIEFING REPORT Q1 2019 1 Notable Cyber Activity within Financial Services Contents January 2019 October 2018 A security researcher discovered that The State Bank of India Between the 4th and 14th October 2018 HSBC reported a number Table of Contents . 1 (SBI), India’s largest bank, had failed to secure a server which of US online bank accounts were accessed by unauthorized users, Welcome . 1 was part of their text-messaging platform. The researcher was with potential access to personal information about the account able to read all messages sent and received by the bank’s ‘SBI holder. HSBC told the BBC this affected fewer than 1% of its 1 Notable Cyber Activity within Financial Services . 2 quick’ enquiry service which contained information on balances, American clients and has not released further information on 2 Threat Actor Profile: The Carbanak Organized Crime Gang . 4 phone numbers and recent transactions. This information could how the unauthorized access occurred. have been used to profile high net worth individuals, or aid social 3 Benefits and challenges of deploying TLS 1.3 . 5 engineering attacks which are one of the most common types of It is likely that this was an example of a credential-stuffing attack, 4 Ethereum Classic (ETC) 51% Attack . 9 financial fraud in India.1 where attackers attempt to authenticate with vast quantities 5 Authoritative DNS Security . 10 of username and password combinations obtained from other December 2018 compromised sites, hoping to find users who have re-used their Kaspersky published a detailed examination of intrusions into credentials elsewhere.
    [Show full text]
  • BRKSEC-2011.Pdf
    #CLUS About Garlic and Onions A little journey… Tobias Mayer, Technical Solutions Architect BRKSEC-2011 #CLUS Me… CCIE Security #14390, CISSP & Motorboat driving license… Working in Content Security & TLS Security tmayer{at}cisco.com Writing stuff at “blogs.cisco.com” #CLUS BRKSEC-2011 © 2018 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Cisco Public 3 Agenda • Why anonymization? • Using Tor (Onion Routing) • How Tor works • Introduction to Onion Routing • Obfuscation within Tor • Domain Fronting • Detect Tor • I2P – Invisible Internet Project • Introduction to Garlic Routing • Conclusion #CLUS BRKSEC-2011 © 2018 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Cisco Public 4 Cisco Webex Teams Questions? Use Cisco Webex Teams (formerly Cisco Spark) to chat with the speaker after the session How 1 Find this session in the Cisco Events App 2 Click “Join the Discussion” 3 Install Webex Teams or go directly to the team space 4 Enter messages/questions in the team space Webex Teams will be moderated cs.co/ciscolivebot#BRKSEC-2011 by the speaker until June 18, 2018. #CLUS © 2018 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Cisco Public 5 Different Intentions Hide me from Government! Hide me from ISP! Hide me from tracking! Bypass Corporate Bypass Country Access Hidden policies restrictions (Videos…) Services #CLUS BRKSEC-2011 © 2018 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Cisco Public 6 Browser Identity Tracking does not require a “Name” Tracking is done by examining parameters your browser reveals https://panopticlick.eff.org #CLUS BRKSEC-2011 © 2018 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Cisco Public 7 Proxies EPIC Browser #CLUS BRKSEC-2011 © 2018 Cisco and/or its affiliates.
    [Show full text]
  • People's Tech Movement to Kick Big Tech out of Africa Could Form a Critical Part of the Global Protests Against the Enduring Legacy of Racism and Colonialism
    CONTENTS Acronyms ................................................................................................................................................ 1 1 Introduction: The Rise of Digital Colonialism and Surveillance Capitalism ..................... 2 2 Threat Modeling .......................................................................................................................... 8 3 The Basics of Information Security and Software ............................................................... 10 4 Mobile Phones: Talking and Texting ...................................................................................... 14 5 Web Browsing ............................................................................................................................ 18 6 Searching the Web .................................................................................................................... 23 7 Sharing Data Safely ................................................................................................................... 25 8 Email Encryption ....................................................................................................................... 28 9 Video Chat ................................................................................................................................... 31 10 Online Document Collaboration ............................................................................................ 34 11 Protecting Your Data ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Trip to TLS Land Using the WSA Tobias Mayer, Consulting Systems Engineer BRKSEC-3006 Me…
    The Trip to TLS Land using the WSA Tobias Mayer, Consulting Systems Engineer BRKSEC-3006 Me… CCIE Security #14390, CISSP & Motorboat driving license… Working in Content Security & IPv6 Security tmayer{at}cisco.com Writing stuff at “blogs.cisco.com” Agenda • Introduction • Understanding TLS • Configuring Decryption on the WSA • Troubleshooting TLS • Thoughts about the Future • Conclusion For Your Reference • There are (many...) slides in your print-outs that will not be presented. • They are there “For your Reference” For Your Reference Microsoft and Google pushing encryption • Microsoft pushing TLS with PFS • Google, FB, Twitter encrypting all traffic • HTTPS usage influencing page ranking on google • Deprecate SHA1, only SHA2+ • Browser Vendors aggressively pushing https • Problems with older TLS versions leading to upgrade of servers to newer protocols and ciphers • Poodle, Freak, Beast, …. Google Search Engine • Google ranking influenced by using HTTPS • http://blog.searchmetrics.com/us/2015 /03/03/https-vs-http-website-ssl-tls- encryption-ranking-seo-secure- connection/ Understanding TLS TLS Versions • SSLv3, 1996 • TLS 1.0, 1999, RFC2246 • TLS 1.1, 2006, RFC4346 • Improved security • TLS 1.2, 2008, RFC5246 • Removed IDEA and DES ciphers • Stronger hashes • Supports authenticated encryption ciphers (AES-GCM) • TLS 1.3, currently Internet Draft Attacks… • POODLE • SSLv3 Problems with Padding, turn of SSLv3 • BEAST • Know issues in CBC mode, use TLS 1.1/1.2 with non-CBC mode ciphers (GCM) • CRIME/BREACH • Compression Data Leak, disable
    [Show full text]
  • How Organisations Can Properly Configure SSL Services to Ensure the Integrity and Confidentiality of Data in Transit”
    An NCC Group Publication “SS-Hell: the Devil is in the details” Or “How organisations can properly configure SSL services to ensure the integrity and confidentiality of data in transit” Prepared by: Will Alexander Jerome Smith © Copyright 2014 NCC Group Contents 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 3 2 Protocols ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 3 Cipher Suites ................................................................................................................................................. 4 4 Certificates ..................................................................................................................................................... 5 4.1 Self-Signed or Untrusted Certificates ................................................................................................... 5 4.2 Mismatched Hostnames ....................................................................................................................... 6 4.3 Wildcard Certificates ............................................................................................................................. 6 4.4 Extended Validation Certificates .......................................................................................................... 7 4.5 Certificate Validity Period ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Blocking-Resistant Communication Through Domain Fronting
    Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies 2015; 2015 (2):46–64 David Fifield*, Chang Lan, Rod Hynes, Percy Wegmann, and Vern Paxson Blocking-resistant communication through domain fronting Abstract: We describe “domain fronting,” a versatile 1 Introduction censorship circumvention technique that hides the re- mote endpoint of a communication. Domain fronting Censorship is a daily reality for many Internet users. works at the application layer, using HTTPS, to com- Workplaces, schools, and governments use technical and municate with a forbidden host while appearing to com- social means to prevent access to information by the net- municate with some other host, permitted by the cen- work users under their control. In response, those users sor. The key idea is the use of different domain names at employ technical and social means to gain access to the different layers of communication. One domain appears forbidden information. We have seen an ongoing conflict on the “outside” of an HTTPS request—in the DNS re- between censor and censored, with advances on both quest and TLS Server Name Indication—while another sides, more subtle evasion countered by more powerful domain appears on the “inside”—in the HTTP Host detection. header, invisible to the censor under HTTPS encryp- Circumventors, at a natural disadvantage because tion. A censor, unable to distinguish fronted and non- the censor controls the network, have a point working fronted traffic to a domain, must choose between allow- in their favor: the censor’s distaste for “collateral dam- ing circumvention traffic and blocking the domain en- age,” incidental overblocking committed in the course of tirely, which results in expensive collateral damage.
    [Show full text]
  • Avocent® ACS 6000 Advanced Console Server Release Notes Version 3.1.0.8 UPDATE! July 24, 2015
    Avocent® ACS 6000 Advanced Console Server Release Notes Version 3.1.0.8 UPDATE! July 24, 2015 This document outlines: 1. Update Instructions 2. Appliance Firmware Version Information 3. Features/Enhancements 4. Bug Fixes =================================================================================== 1. Update Instructions =================================================================================== NOTE: Please refer to the ACS 6000 Installation/Administration/User Guide for detailed instructions on updating the ACS 6000 console server to version 3.1.0. IMPORTANT NOTE: This version should be upgraded from version 2.5.0-11 or newer. Appliances with earlier versions should be upgraded to version 2.5.0-11 or newer before the upgrade to version 3.1.0.8. In order to have all features listed in this release available through DSView™ management software, DSView™ software version 4.5.0.123 or later and ACS 6000 console server plug-in version 3.1.0.4 are required. After the ACS 6000 console server firmware has been upgraded to version 3.1.0, it is mandatory that the web browser cache of any system which intends to be connected to the ACS 6000 console server web interface is cleared. To do this, press Ctrl-F5 from the browser. ACS 6000 console server firmware version 3.1.0 provides an internal mechanism which preserves the existing configuration when upgrading from firmware version 3.0.0. However, it is strongly recommended that you back up the system configuration before the firmware version upgrade. =================================================================================== 2. Appliance Firmware Version Information =================================================================================== Appliance/Product Firmware Type Version Filename Avocent® ACS 6000 Opcode V_3.1.0.8 avoImage_avctacs-3.1.0-8.bin Console Server avoImage_avctacs-3.1.0-8.bin.md5 =================================================================================== 3.
    [Show full text]