← Back to context

Comment by dist-epoch

13 hours ago

And an equal amount of stupidity in the whole ecosystem, apparently there are no "unit-tests" for trivial failure modes, like 8 bits of entropy, before adding a CA to the trusted list.

What next, googling the public key finds a 2 year old pastebin with the private key?

Even just a human glancing at the private key should do it.

Don't they even test script changes on a staging server? How could there be such a script error in production that was not caught in testing/staging?

This sounds very like a fundamental organization error, not an innocent whoopsie. It should lead to a permanent ban of the organization.

  • Well humans should NOT glance at private keys! That is the whole point of HSMs!

    • I'm still flabergasted the HSM allowed this key to be generated. Then again, I've worked with HSMs, there are always many mistakes in the firmware, usually less severe though.

      3 replies →

    • But eMudhra wanted to (was required to) export the keys.

      So using an HSM in the first place is a security theater. Or that this HSM isn't really an HSM since it allows for export of the private key.

      The trusted enclave in a MacBook is more secure than this HSM.

      2 replies →