ramble81 comments on 4..

[–] ramble81@lemmy.zip 20 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

For one value, yes…. But for 8 different keys having stupidly low numbers? They either had a seriously faulty RNG, or more likely were hand creating the keys.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 12 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

And the only reason to make a key that short is if you were trying to give them to someone who shouldn't have them, and needed to avoid any sort of digital trail, even copy and paste... so you would obviously just memorize them.

Memorizing a bunch of 384 bit keys is basically impossible... But memorizing a couple dozen numbers? Child's play.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

You underestimate the power of laziness and incompetence, I think

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 11 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Considering keys like this are usually copied and pasted anywhere they might need to be manually entered... There is zero reason to make them small enough to be human-readable, unless that's your actual intended use.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

"I need a 384-bit key... I have no idea how to generate one... oh, screw it... 4"

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 8 points 2 weeks ago

Anyone in a position where they are responsible for generating a root key for a certificate authority, 100% knows how to generate a key in their sleep.

The only explanation is that it was made easy intentionally, not lazily.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] Corn@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago

If that's what they needed, just remember an equation that turns easily remembered numbers into a 384 bit key.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent