lvh

44 ms·

451.
by lvh 7y ago
You say that's not the system you want but that's based on a pretty big "if": you need "someone else" to validate something, and those people can't talk to you directly and ask you if it's valid or no
452.
by lvh 7y ago
I don't understand your analogy. Can you elaborate? I don't see the parallel between (a)symmetric signatures and encrypting passwords.
453.
by lvh 7y ago
How to survive a HN hug of death: http://archive.is/r8pHs (The site was down, I archived it.)
454.
by lvh 7y ago
Does that work? I’d expect you want to do a fairly traditional road-based ETA? Otherwise you’ll be wildly off if you’re in a cul de sac next to a major highway or on said highway, or in massive traffic vs not at all.
455.
by lvh 7y ago
I'm suggesting that the Yubikey experience isn't exactly flawless. I use Qubes too, but I don't think everyone should have it as a daily driver. If you want to use Yubikeys for SSH, that's fine. IF you want to use Yubike
456.
by lvh 7y ago
I was going to say something about how the article does mention several alternatives, some of which far more widely deployed than OpenPGP. But first: hold up. "Some kid"? You mean Filippo Valsorda? Google's Go Crypto person?
457.
by lvh 7y ago
Does this improve on gpg2 —list-packets for practical debugging/auditing of extant GPG setups, or is just useful for people who want to do alchemy on top of the OpenPGP packet format?
458.
by lvh 7y ago
That’s a fair criticism and I will happily admit that’s what it should say: that all PGP users are morons. (Just kidding. You’re right re: bug bounty advice.)
459.
by lvh 7y ago
Anecdote about said startups: in 2y of the one big bounty that did have a PGP key, we got one PGPd report, and it was “session takeover”: if I copy the cookie out of Burp and into a new Incognito session, I will be logged in. Bounty plz? We
460.
by lvh 7y ago
“Bidirectional”. So peers can mostly talk to each other. Do you really want to die on that particular semantic hill? “These Ethernet frames have source and destination addresses eventually”?
461.
by lvh 7y ago
Sure. We do that for eg SSH. I don’t think it’s a great idea for our standard audience (startups) to implement.
462.
by lvh 7y ago
It sounds like you’re saying “and that’s why GPG is good”, but I read that as an argument why there’s a very high probability that one of those things is going to spill the beans, plaintext, in an email anyway.
463.
by lvh 7y ago
There are two ways that breaks: - your key won’t be private forever but future compromise does mean past disclosure - on long enough timescales if said TLAs can mount offline attacks against it. So, maybe? But it’s definitely the safest way
464.
by lvh 7y ago
If you squint enough, that’s how CAs work too.
465.
by lvh 7y ago
KMS is a service, it’s already on.
466.
by lvh 7y ago
Secure messaging is much more complex, but here’s a simple example of how that’s not true: TCP is bidirectional and email is one message, fire and forget. That immediately affects your ability to have forward and backward secrecy.
467.
by lvh 7y ago
KMS historical downtime is pretty great, rate limits have been bumped quite a bit to the point where I seriously doubt you're hitting them for secrets management, I'm not sure you can do a lot of useful things with most secrets wh
468.
by lvh 7y ago
Okiedokie: you should just use wormhole then: wormhole receive 4-gossamer-hamlet-cellulose-suspense-fortitude-guidance-hydraulic-snowslide-equation-indulge-liberty-chisel-montana-blockade-burlington-quiver :-)
469.
by lvh 7y ago
Do you feel like PGP is a good way to cold email people in practice? (I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but that sounds like what you're saying.)
470.
by lvh 7y ago
OK, so you're saying something like: magic send <FILE> magic receive <CODE> magic encrypt <FILE> magic sign <FILE> ... that ideally all have NaCl at the base but are otherwise one binary that you ha
471.
by lvh 7y ago
Yes! E-mail is fundamentally terribly positioned to do secure messaging. You can use e-mail, or you can have cryptography that works and have people use it, but you can't do both.
472.
by lvh 7y ago
what's wrong with an online system managing the secrets? KMS is great, and makes it easy to separate decrypt from encrypt permissions. (KMS is not the only option! I'm just trying to eke out why you think that's valuable. For
473.
by lvh 7y ago
> (signal uses PGP with a CA type of thing, so much for "stop using pgp") I legitimately have no idea what this means. > And how is essentially forking pgp with 'age' really going to solve things? Wow thanks anothe
474.
by lvh 7y ago
Yep, the default python implementation lets you pick a code and generate a code with more than 2 words. I'm just cautious in telling people to twiddle knobs that don't need twiddling :-) But you can absolutely go up to 2^-64 or w
475.
by lvh 7y ago
Re: common core: isn't that already happening? age and signify are both based on those 2, and magic-wormhole arguably is too (though point addition is not always exposed, so SPAKE2 is a little harder to implement than signify).
476.
by lvh 7y ago
Re: magic-wormhole's 16 bits: I don't think you should be worried about that, because SPAKE2 will give you proof positive if the attacker attempts to guess. Are you saying 2*-16 success isn't good enough?
477.
by lvh 7y ago
I did some "OpenPGP Best Practices" work for a client recently. They don't have a choice, because a third party requires it. The goal was to make sure it was as safe as possible. One thing that struck me is that I have a simp
478.
by lvh 7y ago
I think Rich Hickey's (the creator of Clojure) talk, The Value of Values, to be a great 'splainer: https://youtu.be/-6BsiVyC1kM
479.
by lvh 7y ago
Somewhat: you want the number to be as unsmooth (having few small factors) as possible. Since the factorial is the product of all numbers up to a given number, that happens when the top number is a prime, since the next number is necessaril
480.
by lvh 7y ago
It doesn't, but I also didn't say it did?

More ›