While Reddit mods and admin try to keep up with the site's "no violence" terms of use, Facebook and LinkedIn is reacting with tens of thousands of laughing emojis.
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.
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.
It is almost never a question of whether it’s possible or not. You WILL make a mistake. It’s just a question of how much effort you’re worth as an individual.
You think having a fake online name will stop them from finding out who you are? Did you even pay attention to the Snowden leaks?
deleted by creator
They also have backdoors in most implementations of TLS, according to a person I know who worked government security.
deleted by creator
Still takes more work than just giving them that information.
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.
It is almost never a question of whether it’s possible or not. You WILL make a mistake. It’s just a question of how much effort you’re worth as an individual.
right, don’t make it easy for them. plus they got prolly got half a country to put on the list now.
When everyone is on the list, noone is.
No, they said we already knew about that and didn’t give it another thought.