4 ms·
That's right. But you'd have to attack an extraordinary number of transfers to have even a small chance of managing to get one by luck, and an attack of that sc
by bscphil 6y ago
That's right. But you'd have to attack an extraordinary number of transfers to have even a small chance of managing to get one by luck, and an attack of that scale would very quickly become obvious since everyone would have their transfers interrupted. I agree with you in principle though, I'd like to see just a bit more entropy.
- lioeters 6y ago> a bit more entropy The appropriate use of "bit" here made me smile.
- Dangeranger 6y agoIncreasing the passphrase to four words would bring the odds up to 1 / 6,990,080,303,376. In magic-tunnel I believe there is a flag to change the number of words used by default. It appears that schollz/croc allows you to use your own passphrase, but not increase the default word size, that would be a good feature request.
- bscphil 6y agoYou're quite right, of course, but keep in mind that magic-wormhole is using a much smaller wordlist, and in fact only has 1 / 65536 odds by default. The people writing software in this space don't seem to believe this is a credible threat.
- psanford 6y agoYou can use whatever string you want as the passphrase for Magic Wormhole, the receiver just won't get tab completion.
- Dangeranger 6y agoHow would tab completion work in a situation like this? Are the clients exchanging information about the passphrase over the same communication channel?