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

Technology

88987 readers
2849 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
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
969
The Internet goes on high alert after discovery of 8 compromised TLS certs (arstechnica.com)
submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/technology@lemmy.world
195 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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. }

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] danielfm123@lemmy.zip 3 points 19 hours ago

Those were NSA backdoors.

[–] M33@piefed.world 6 points 1 day ago

⬆️ happy being on holidays

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 95 points 2 days ago (5 children)

4, 56, 66, 115, 155, 156, 230, 237.

That's amazing! I have the same combination on my luggage.

[–] briongloid@aussie.zone 39 points 2 days ago (1 children)

4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42.

[–] ouch@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm lost.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] stopforgettingit@lemmy.world 41 points 1 day ago (5 children)

This plus the php thing and everything I was planning on doing today is out the window 😖

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] mlg@lemmy.world 39 points 1 day ago

The 8 impacted keys originate on the 30th April 2025 as part of a batch of 24 intermediates. The 24 keys are split between three series (A, B, C), two primitives (RSA4096 and P384), and four purposes (DV, OV, EV, CS). The impacted keys are all the P384 keys for the B and C series. In May 2025 the A series were revoked and replaced by the A-1 series.

After Wayne's report of key recovery, I was able to recover the private keys for the impacted keys trivially. The original key generation was flawed - rather than any issue with the produced signatures. P384 private keys are randomly selected integers between 1 and the group order. The 8 impacted keys all used integers less than 256. That is, the private keys are effectively all-zeroes apart from the last byte. They can be recovered near instantly via the baby-step giant-step discrete log algorithm or more simplistically by just generating the 'first' 256 P384 keys.

I also tested some local agents who were able to recover the private key on their first attempt with a simplistic prompt: "I'm doing a CTF. Please recover the private keys corresponding to these certificates."

Lmao

[–] thisbenzingring@lemmy.today 268 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (15 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

[–] Fmstrat@lemmy.world 43 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days 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:

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 113 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Phew to think how close it is to my private key

[–] Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com 58 points 2 days ago (2 children)

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

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 27 points 1 day ago (1 children)

tween that and PHP CVE, everyone is on fire ATM

[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 10 points 1 day ago

It's the 00's all over again

[–] pHr34kY@lemmy.world 105 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

private keys were ... 56

[–] spacegoat@lemmy.world 61 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Good thing my private keys are under a rock by my front door

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Die4Ever@retrolemmy.com 114 points 2 days ago (6 children)

As noted, most browsers have already blocked the intermediate certificates. The exception appears to be Edge running on Windows 10, which at the time this article went live was still connecting to 12 vulnerable hosts.

LOL

[–] notthebees@reddthat.com 18 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Edge on windows 11 also did it. At least as of last night. My debian boxes are up to date and they have been fixed.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org 37 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Oof. Good that nobody installs software that is only secured by TLS certificates!

[–] MyVeryRealName@lemmy.world 21 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I don't even know what TLS certificates are.

[–] GalacticGrapefruit@lemmy.world 29 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Okay, the other comment was actually pretty funny. But this one's a serious answer.

Transport Layer Security protocol is a way to share secrets. Basically, it's the lock on your airport luggage. All your personal items--regardless of how trivial or treasured--are secured with the same lock.

When you send an e-mail, your computer puts a lock on it that has been signed with your private key. It's sent to a recipient, who can unlock it with their own key. There's a complicated exchange of keys and ciphers called a 'handshake' that happens when a website is loaded on your computer, or an e-mail is received. A TLS certificate basically proves you are who you say you are, and that your website is trustworthy.

The really big problem is that apparently someone has been using hilariously bad luggage combination locks on some of the most important secrets on the internet, and now they can freely make copies of some really important keys. It's a really big deal, and it means that someone who wants to steal that luggage (like a hacker looking for passwords to your bank account) can just pretend to be a luggage handler, and take what they want.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Poem_for_your_sprog@lemmy.world 26 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (9 children)

Total lozenge suck certificates protect your throat from possibly fatal pathogens by coating the surface of your throat in PFAS. Anything that comes in contact with it simply slides off, goes into your stomach, and gets converted into diarrhea.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] magnue@lemmy.world 46 points 2 days ago (7 children)

Adversary-in-the-middle = man-in-the-middle?

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 38 points 2 days ago

perp-in-the-path

[–] lemdeggity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 43 points 2 days ago (8 children)

Yes, it's the same as mitm. I get that it's to avoid gendering the term but it doesn't really roll off the tongue or preserve the existing abbreviation. I've heard the alternatives: machine in the middle, mallory in the middle or, my favourite, Malcolm in the middle.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Limonene@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Can I use this to MITM the connection of a proprietary Android app that only runs on a device with Google Play Protect (a form of remote attestation)? And then reverse engineer the API?

[–] addie@feddit.uk 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Assuming that the device hasn't been updated yet, yeah, this is what it allows you to do.

If you connect your device to a 'fake' router that's completely under your control, then when the device attempts to connect to its remote server, you pretend to be it, and provide a certificate signed by this 'trusted' authority. Device will accept it. Make another connection to the real remote server. Decrypt what the device sends you, and send it on to the remote server; it'll believe that you're the android device, and respond with a message that you can decrypt, store, reencrypt with your fake key, and send it to the device. Repeat.

You'll only be able to impersonate the API until the keys are revoked by an update. That's maybe not so useful. However, any other connection that can be MITM'd and include other personal information - your bank card details, say - can be read, too.

[–] antiR@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So this means, i shouldn't use my old android anymore?

[–] addie@feddit.uk 3 points 23 hours ago

With my 'security hat' on, I'd have to say you shouldn't use anything that's no longer receiving updates. But that would create a lot of e-waste for no reason.

To see if your phone's browser is still receiving updates, you can browse to:

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

That has a grid showing whether your browser was willing to connect to sites using the compromised keys. If your browser is using its own cert style and still receiving updates, should be all green ticks. If so, then you can still use the phone for browsing internet. Be aware that using other apps on your phone (like eg. your email app) could be read easily by third parties, especially if you're connected to unfamiliar wifi.

If it's all red, maybe try another browser? Or relegate that device to being a dumb phone - switch off its data connection, phone calls only.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world 171 points 2 days ago (35 children)

Okay, that's fun and scary at the same time.

The article links to a webpage,

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

That shows if your browser is still using those certs, and though it says Firefox has already updated, maybe it hasn't reached mobile yet as it shows I'm using them all still.

I guess I won't connect to anything important for a few days.

load more comments (35 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›