you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 44 points 1 day ago (5 children)

It's a different thingymajigger.

One of the orgs that does TLS infrastructure was found to have used 4, a number from Sesame Street, as a private key on a TLS cert that was used to sign other certs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    Just to add. Those private keys are a 85 to 170 digits random number.

    A very central company whose security the entire internet depends on picked 00000000000....0000004.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    I can’t tell if it’s like, completely awful or kind of awesome. I mean, no one brute-forces private key space one bit at a time, do they?

    Hey America’s nuclear launch code was eight zeros (“00000000”) at some point in the 1960s; technically we’ve survived worse

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 day ago

    I originally thought nobody would try brute forcing simple keys like this, but then the person who found the vulnerability did it so I bet other people have done it. It's less "gee hope this works" and more "If someone screwed up there key generation this might work," and screwing up key generation is a known problem. Rare, but it does happen as this case demonstrates.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago

    Almost assuredly someone is brute forcing all single-byte keys. In fact the private key equal to 4 is a single-bit, or "one hot" key, so an attacker could have found it by brute-forcing 384 different keys 😂

  • source
  • parent