▲ 177 ▼ My Private Key (thelemmy.club) submitted 1 day ago by cm0002@lemdro.id to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev 11 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] sheridan@lemmy.world 21 points 23 hours ago (7 children) I'm OOTL. Why am I seeing the number 4 everywhere? permalink fedilink source hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] kubica@fedia.io 36 points 23 hours ago Indian certification authority eMudhra’s private keys compromised – one of them was the number ‘4’ permalink fedilink source parent [–] MaggiWuerze@feddit.org 5 points 23 hours ago (5 children) I assume his private key ended up being mostly 4s? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 26 points 23 hours ago* (4 children) "Mostly", that's commendable optimism on your part. Not mostly but entirely. It's the entirety of the key: 4. https://emudhra.we-have-a-problem.com/ Edit: the source I wanted to link is down, probably server overwhelm. Ask the search engine of your choice for emudhra. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca 7 points 22 hours ago (2 children) Wasn’t it a bunch of zeros followed by a 4? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] rtxn@lemmy.world 9 points 20 hours ago Yes... but no. You probably saw a rendering error. The private keys in question were only eight bits in length (decimal values 0 to 255). A proper key for the specific encryption should have been 384 bits, or about 116 decimal digits. If a string format function expects a 384 bit number, but only receives 8, it might fill out the missing places with zeroes. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 14 points 22 hours ago I've been lead to believe that that makes no difference. permalink fedilink source parent [–] MaggiWuerze@feddit.org 1 point 22 hours ago Hahaha, yeah just read it. Amazing... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kubica@fedia.io 36 points 23 hours ago Indian certification authority eMudhra’s private keys compromised – one of them was the number ‘4’ permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MaggiWuerze@feddit.org 5 points 23 hours ago (5 children) I assume his private key ended up being mostly 4s? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 26 points 23 hours ago* (4 children) "Mostly", that's commendable optimism on your part. Not mostly but entirely. It's the entirety of the key: 4. https://emudhra.we-have-a-problem.com/ Edit: the source I wanted to link is down, probably server overwhelm. Ask the search engine of your choice for emudhra. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca 7 points 22 hours ago (2 children) Wasn’t it a bunch of zeros followed by a 4? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] rtxn@lemmy.world 9 points 20 hours ago Yes... but no. You probably saw a rendering error. The private keys in question were only eight bits in length (decimal values 0 to 255). A proper key for the specific encryption should have been 384 bits, or about 116 decimal digits. If a string format function expects a 384 bit number, but only receives 8, it might fill out the missing places with zeroes. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 14 points 22 hours ago I've been lead to believe that that makes no difference. permalink fedilink source parent [–] MaggiWuerze@feddit.org 1 point 22 hours ago Hahaha, yeah just read it. Amazing... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 26 points 23 hours ago* (4 children) "Mostly", that's commendable optimism on your part. Not mostly but entirely. It's the entirety of the key: 4. https://emudhra.we-have-a-problem.com/ Edit: the source I wanted to link is down, probably server overwhelm. Ask the search engine of your choice for emudhra. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca 7 points 22 hours ago (2 children) Wasn’t it a bunch of zeros followed by a 4? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] rtxn@lemmy.world 9 points 20 hours ago Yes... but no. You probably saw a rendering error. The private keys in question were only eight bits in length (decimal values 0 to 255). A proper key for the specific encryption should have been 384 bits, or about 116 decimal digits. If a string format function expects a 384 bit number, but only receives 8, it might fill out the missing places with zeroes. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 14 points 22 hours ago I've been lead to believe that that makes no difference. permalink fedilink source parent [–] MaggiWuerze@feddit.org 1 point 22 hours ago Hahaha, yeah just read it. Amazing... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca 7 points 22 hours ago (2 children) Wasn’t it a bunch of zeros followed by a 4? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] rtxn@lemmy.world 9 points 20 hours ago Yes... but no. You probably saw a rendering error. The private keys in question were only eight bits in length (decimal values 0 to 255). A proper key for the specific encryption should have been 384 bits, or about 116 decimal digits. If a string format function expects a 384 bit number, but only receives 8, it might fill out the missing places with zeroes. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 14 points 22 hours ago I've been lead to believe that that makes no difference. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 9 points 20 hours ago Yes... but no. You probably saw a rendering error. The private keys in question were only eight bits in length (decimal values 0 to 255). A proper key for the specific encryption should have been 384 bits, or about 116 decimal digits. If a string format function expects a 384 bit number, but only receives 8, it might fill out the missing places with zeroes. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Lumidaub@feddit.org 14 points 22 hours ago I've been lead to believe that that makes no difference. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MaggiWuerze@feddit.org 1 point 22 hours ago Hahaha, yeah just read it. Amazing... permalink fedilink source parent