this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2024
1668 points (99.2% liked)
Technology
59963 readers
3431 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I work in cryptography, and I guarantee if that's true "some person you know who worked in government security" would not tell you if they did know, or they are pulling shit out of their ass. There have been so many people that have looked at or worked on SSL/TLS implementations (including some of my coworkers), any vulnerabilities would have to be pretty subtle or clever, and that would be kept highly classified. Quit making shit up or repeating bullshit you heard.
Sure, if we’re talking about code vulnerabilities only. It’s most likely a compromised root cert though.
That just would allow a malicious attacker to fake being the server, it doesn't actually compromise the TLS session. So you are talking about a much more sophisticated multi stage attack that needs to be actively executed. This wouldn't at all allow them to record traffic and decrypt later.
The certs authenticate that you are talking to the real server, the symmetric session keys that are usually derived from a diffie helman key exchange have nothing to do with certs. That's two separate (but connected) parts of the transaction to build a TLS session.
Right, this would be a MitM vulnerability, which could be reasonably viable for targeted attacks.