Internet infrastructure companies using '5' as their private key are sweating bullets. They know they are next.
jkingsman 4 hours ago [-]
Oh boy. I wonder how many other companies that have previously been lax about validating that cert revocation is handled correctly by their devices are going to validate the eMudrha cert revocation and discover that they are not, in fact, handling revocation correctly. Yikes.
therein 10 minutes ago [-]
At least it will be better moving forward, one can hope.
whizzter 2 hours ago [-]
This caught my eye, remember how the eMudhra certificates had weirdly low parameters, like 4 and others in the single digits?
"Mbed TLS - Medium, CVSS 5.9 - A buffer-length typo reduces a 2048-bit DH modulus to one byte. TLS 1.2 DHE_RSA sessions are decryptable when the client accepts the broken parameters. GOAHEAD-SA-2026-0005."
Not familiar with those implementation details but was this the root cause?
eichin 9 minutes ago [-]
Nice thing about this one is that we have the implementation details right in the article:
The first sizeof(dhm_g) should have been sizeof(dhm_p). So, do you attribute this to a simple typo (hard to catch at a glance due to similar letter shapes), "single letter variable names are bad" but the wikipedia page on DH also calls them p and g - it takes a little digging to get that "root" and "modulus" would have been better names, but maybe having them directly match the most common form of the equation would have made them easier to review...
Or do you just add it to the list of C crimes, that "passing storage length and pointer" is maybe the worst possible way to return written-to storage from a function :-)
deakmisra 3 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
tnetherton 3 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
nderdweik 4 hours ago [-]
nice i abs like this
monster_truck 32 minutes ago [-]
4
Rendered at 23:04:19 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
"Mbed TLS - Medium, CVSS 5.9 - A buffer-length typo reduces a 2048-bit DH modulus to one byte. TLS 1.2 DHE_RSA sessions are decryptable when the client accepts the broken parameters. GOAHEAD-SA-2026-0005."
Not familiar with those implementation details but was this the root cause?
Or do you just add it to the list of C crimes, that "passing storage length and pointer" is maybe the worst possible way to return written-to storage from a function :-)