3 ms·
The actual issue seems to be that some tools ask the user to provide a random seed, then accept anything non-empty, even if it’s too short or otherwise obviousl
by handsclean 1y ago
The actual issue seems to be that some tools ask the user to provide a random seed, then accept anything non-empty, even if it’s too short or otherwise obviously not random. The reporter argues this is a critical security vulnerability, Google argues this is just a usability issue. Google subsequently added additional validation to make sure it’s also the right length.
Personally, I think usability issues can have security implications. Taken to the extreme, look at RSA: technically possible to use securely, but widely considered insecure because everybody screws it up. Modern crypto libraries are all about achieving better security by fixing footguns. This issue isn’t RSA, but I bet fully fixing this issue would make a small but tangible number of insecure users secure. I think Google should have a clear and spelled out policy re usability issues with security implications, and should give this guy at least some reward, even if it’s not the “critical vulnerability” he makes it out to be.
- Eikon 1y agoI think "critical" is due to the context, it's supposed to be trusted software that participates in the trusted public key infrastructure. If your seed is corrupted, the whole model collapses. There's not a ton of diversity in CT implementations.