613
4.. (slrpnk.net)
submitted 3 weeks ago by to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev
40 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

https://snug.moe/@xeno

all 40 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 75 points 3 weeks ago (9 children)

Someone must have used getRandomNumber().

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 60 points 3 weeks ago (8 children)

    hey now!

    4 is just as random as 29833638292F9373638292926262141414331252526283994040218 is

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 20 points 3 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
    •
  • [–] 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
    •
  • [–] 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
    •
  • [–] 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
    •
  • [–] 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
    •
  • [–] 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
    • [–] 49 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    "Now?" "Now," said Deep Thought. They both licked their dry lips. "Though I don't think," added Deep Thought. "that you're going to like it." "Doesn't matter!" said Phouchg. "We must know it! Now!" "Now?" inquired Deep Thought. "Yes! Now..." "All right," said the computer, and settled into silence again. The two men fidgeted. The tension was unbearable. "You're really not going to like it," observed Deep Thought.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 34 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    two finyallys!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 27 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

    Does this mean no one tried a sequential brute force attack on these systems?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 62 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Someone probably did. They probably didn’t share that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 13 points 3 weeks ago

    Thankfully modern browsers use Certificate Transparency, and there's no indication that any compromised certs were actually used publicly.

    However, there are many devices that use TLS which are not browsers, and those devices could in theory be selectively targeted with an evil cert without alerting the public CT servers.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 17 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    The answer to life, the universe and everything...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 14 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

    It’s probably already cracked by NSA or something.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    Don't need it cracked today if you can store all the encrypted data in the world existing now, waiting for the day cracking it becomes feasible. It might be a bit outdated, but boy would the AI companies still over that training set.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [–] 8 points 2 weeks ago

    Could be 42, you never know.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    finally built a quantum computer

    Bro knows we been had them for a while now, right?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

    Never. That's not even an RSA prime. It would always be either 3 or 5.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

    whooosh

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago (4 children)

    Huh, you responded to my message 3 hours after I deleted it. Not because whoosh, I'm well aware of your stupid meme, but because it wasn't a proper use of an RSA prime.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    hmm for me your message is still visible

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago

    🫪

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •