News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Socat: “the hard coded 1024 bit DH p parameter was not prime”. Parent comment

Re:Socat: “the hard coded 1024 bit DH p parameter was not pr... by bigiain on Monday February 01, 2016 @05:27PM (#11016093)
<cynical thought>That's a nice piece of plausible deniability, huh? I wonder if the committer has a few extra bytes that he can claim were supposed to be there which make a number that passes all the primality tests? That'd be a nice excuse for the NSA/3PLA overlords to have given him...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Socat: “the hard coded 1024 bit DH p parameter was not pr... by cperciva on Monday February 01, 2016 @06:38PM (#11016577)
Extra bytes would have made it not a 1024-bit integer.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Socat: “the hard coded 1024 bit DH p parameter was not pr... by gertef on Monday February 01, 2016 @09:10PM (#11017259)
Whicgh provides an excuse for why the prime was truncated, and OOPS made it into a not-prime.
[ Parent | on HN ]