3 ms·

> Suggesting a tabula rasa rewrite of NSS would more likely be met with genuine concern for your mental well-being, than by incredulity or skepticism. Why? I d

> Suggesting a tabula rasa rewrite of NSS would more likely be met with genuine concern for your mental well-being, than by incredulity or skepticism. Why? I don't get it. Maintenance of NSS has to be seriously expensive.

hedora 5y ago
The NSA was caught intentionally complicating that spec. The idea was to ensure it was impossible to implement correctly, and therefore be a bottomless well of zero days for them to exploit. Gotta love the US government’s war against crypto.
- ajxs 5y ago
  Can you provide more information on this? I'd be interested to read about this topic.
  - astrange 5y ago
    He's confused it with Dual_EC_DRBG, a backdoored random number generator in a different non-international standard. SSL is complicated because we didn't understand how to design secure protocols in the 90s. Didn't need help.
    - hedora 5y ago
      No; this predated that by about a decade. They had moles on the committees that codified SSL in the 90’s. Those moles added a bunch of extensions specifically to increase the likelihood of implementation bugs in the handshake. I’m reasonably sure it was covered in cryptogram a few decades ago. These days, it’s not really discoverable via internet search, since the EC thing drowned it out. Edit: Here’s the top secret budget for the program from 2013. It alludes to ensuring 4G implementations are exploitable, and to some other project that was adding exploits to something, but ramping down. This is more than a decade after the SSL standards sabotage campaign that was eventually uncovered: http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/784159/sigintenabling-clean-1.pdf http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/784159/sigintenabling-... With SSL, the moles kept vetoing attempts to simplify the spec, and also kept adding complications, citing secret knowledge. It sounds like they did the same thing to 4G. Note the headcount numbers: Over 100 moles, spanning multiple industries.
- alophawen 5y ago
  Sorry for sounding like a broken record, but source please?

hedora 5y ago

The NSA was caught intentionally complicating that spec. The idea was to ensure it was impossible to implement correctly, and therefore be a bottomless well of zero days for them to exploit. Gotta love the US government’s war against crypto.

ajxs 5y ago
Can you provide more information on this? I'd be interested to read about this topic.
- astrange 5y ago
  He's confused it with Dual_EC_DRBG, a backdoored random number generator in a different non-international standard. SSL is complicated because we didn't understand how to design secure protocols in the 90s. Didn't need help.
  - hedora 5y ago
    No; this predated that by about a decade. They had moles on the committees that codified SSL in the 90’s. Those moles added a bunch of extensions specifically to increase the likelihood of implementation bugs in the handshake. I’m reasonably sure it was covered in cryptogram a few decades ago. These days, it’s not really discoverable via internet search, since the EC thing drowned it out. Edit: Here’s the top secret budget for the program from 2013. It alludes to ensuring 4G implementations are exploitable, and to some other project that was adding exploits to something, but ramping down. This is more than a decade after the SSL standards sabotage campaign that was eventually uncovered: http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/784159/sigintenabling-clean-1.pdf http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/784159/sigintenabling-... With SSL, the moles kept vetoing attempts to simplify the spec, and also kept adding complications, citing secret knowledge. It sounds like they did the same thing to 4G. Note the headcount numbers: Over 100 moles, spanning multiple industries.
alophawen 5y ago
Sorry for sounding like a broken record, but source please?