News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Technical feasibility of decrypting https by replacing th... by res0nat0r on Sunday July 14, 2013 @01:10PM (#6041399)
By recent events I'm assuming you are referring to the NSA. Note: What the NSA has been doing is well known and has been outlined in detail in the press all the way back to 2008. The country just hasn't cared enough to pay attention until the current exciting manhunt underway.
Re:Technical feasibility of decrypting https by replacing th... by willurd on Sunday July 14, 2013 @01:17PM (#6041414)
This is the first I'm hearing of it, and I imagine the first a lot of other people are hearing of it. Two things:

1. Just because it's old news, doesn't mean it isn't news for a lot of people.

2. My point still stands: some conspiracy theories do turn out to be true (do a search for "conspiracy theories that were proven true"), so wholesale calling conspiracy theorists nut jobs, or saying they are "tinfoil hat" wearers is unbelievably shortsighted.

Re:Technical feasibility of decrypting https by replacing th... by res0nat0r on Sunday July 14, 2013 @01:28PM (#6041456)
I guess the larger point is: the current NSA issue should in no way be considered a conspiracy since it has been well known, and not hidden (if you have been paying attention) from the outset. Also jumping to a conspiracy theory re: what tptacek is saying is shortsighted, unless you have actual relevant evidence to support said conspiracy.
Re:Technical feasibility of decrypting https by replacing th... by Myrmornis on Sunday July 14, 2013 @10:47PM (#6043392)
It's not of interest whether or not people should be considered ignorant if the recent NSA information was news to them. willurd was correctly pointing out that the phrase "tinfoil hat" used by tptacek is an empty insult, which avoids the need to say something more intelligent in its place. I agree with him that it's inappropriate in this forum.
Re:Technical feasibility of decrypting https by replacing th... by nitrogen on Sunday July 14, 2013 @05:13PM (#6042266)
Two months ago the mainstream would have called anyone talking about the NSA a nutjob, and anybody not looking closely probably thinks Snowden is a vile traitor. No matter how "known" the issue is, every new piece of evidence helps convince a few more people to care.
Re:Technical feasibility of decrypting https by replacing th... by tptacek on Sunday July 14, 2013 @10:14PM (#6043288)
No, this isn't true; rather, it's something people on HN and Reddit say to make themselves feel smarter. In cryptography, it has been article of faith for decades that the NSA is actively working to subvert the security of public cryptography.

The problem with the rdrand conspiracy theory isn't that it's unreasonable to believe the NSA is trying to backdoor something; it's that it's a stupid backdoor, and that the logic that delivers you to the conclusion that it's a backdoor also concludes that everything else must be a backdoor.

Re:Technical feasibility of decrypting https by replacing th... by nitrogen on Monday July 15, 2013 @12:22AM (#6043698)
I was only addressing res0nat0r's comment that the NSA's broad surveillance was well known, not the possibility that Intel's HWRNG is compromised. I agree that if you can't trust your CPU, all bets are off, but there is probably a different way of expressing the futility and improbability of such a situation that doesn't use the word tinfoil.