4 ms·
The article doesn't say what your paraphrase says, though, and even less of what your next sentence says. The various RSA implementations with serious problems
by pvg 5y ago
The article doesn't say what your paraphrase says, though, and even less of what your next sentence says. The various RSA implementations with serious problems it brings up weren't all 'own RSA or unaudited third party library'.
- prophesi 5y agoTwo of the images in the article is https://i0.wp.com/blog.trailofbits.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/image13-1.png?resize=500%2C485&ssl=1 https://i0.wp.com/blog.trailofbits.com/wp-content/uploads/20... And https://i0.wp.com/blog.trailofbits.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/image14.jpg?resize=523%2C500&ssl=1 https://i0.wp.com/blog.trailofbits.com/wp-content/uploads/20... So it sounds like the main pain-point is improper implementation. Though the padding oracle attack is convincing to use something else, as it's necessary to pad yet still opens up to a different attack vector.
- pvg 5y agoThe article mentions various RSA implementations that have had problems. The other thing is, since they do audits and are telling you to avoid RSA, the advice obviously isn't 'a properly audited RSA is fine'. "it's actually ok to use RSA" is not a reasonable conclusion to draw from this piece.
- prophesi 5y agoI think the crux of the argument is summed up here: > Developers could theoretically build an ECC implementation with terrible parameters and fail to check for things like invalid curve points, but they tend to not do this. So, it's just about trusting developers to implement a different algorithm properly.