this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2026
965 points (99.7% liked)

Technology

89747 readers
4418 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Astonishingly, the private keys were 4, 56, 66, 115, 155, 156, 230, 237.

exploiting compromised certificates requires an active adversary-in-the-middle attack, meaning the attacker must act as a proxy between two TLS parties and receive encrypted traffic, decrypt it, reencrypt it, and send it to the other party. Such capabilities, in some cases, are usually limited to only the most well-resourced attackers. People with control of a local network—at a coffee shop, university, or other organization—face much less of a challenge.

https://emudhra.we-have-a-problem.com/

Xkcd 221: int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // chosen by fair dice roll. guaranteed to be random. }

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] thisbenzingring@lemmy.today 264 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (6 children)

I think that this isn't really getting the right attention, about what a massive WTF situation this is...

its a 384 bit certificate and this is the private key

00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:
00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:
00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:
00:00:04

that is just fucking NUTS

[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 112 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Phew to think how close it is to my private key

[–] Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com 59 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

that’s a very long way to spell the random number 4

[–] miadidi@lemmy.world 40 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] victorz@lemmy.world 17 points 3 weeks ago

That kind of removes the bit size and hides it in assumption.

[–] Fmstrat@lemmy.world 42 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

And 8 of them no less. The guess of this being test code leaking into prod is likely, but security focused companies need consequences for stuff like this. That being said:

[–] dankm@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 weeks ago

Looks like consequences to me...

[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 22 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It's like winning the lottery

[–] prime_number_314159@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

Winning the lottery is (ballpark) 1 in 10^9, so generating a key below a million is like winning 11 lotteries in a row, while buying 1 ticket in each.

They wouldn't know how you'd done it, but I think you'd be arrested, with valid probable cause.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 12 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)
4E:65:76:65:72:20:67:6F:6E:6E:61:20:67:69:76:
65:20:79:6F:75:20:75:70:20:4E:65:76:65:72:20:
67:6F:6E:6E:61:20:6C:65:74:20:79:6F:75:20:64:
6F:77:6E

is much more secure.

[–] not@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

LOL, People are never gonna give this up.

[–] modus@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm too lazy to do the math. Does that translate to the URL?

[–] not@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 weeks ago

No, it is a string of text. "Never gonna give you up never gonna let you down"

[–] sonoro@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

"Never gonna give you up never gonna let you down "

[–] Localhorst86@feddit.org 2 points 3 weeks ago

ROFL, People are never gonna let this down.

[–] ramble81@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I mean, yes, it’s entirely possible and within the realm of probability of getting that as a key. But realistically it’s very, very, fucking unlikely.

[–] Kraiden@piefed.social 10 points 3 weeks ago

Ye, I'd struggle to believe ONE key getting generated like that, but 8 points to pure incompetence

[–] Toribor@corndog.social 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Isn't every key equally unlikely?

[–] ramble81@lemmy.zip 8 points 3 weeks ago

Yes, be in is why having 8 of them total in the 2 digit range (I.e only using up to 6 bits of 384-bits) just screams incompetence of a hand generated key.