Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't this still be susceptible to DNS Spoofing? This goes under the assumption that the URL has not been tampered with, if I'm not mistaken?
SQRL - Replacement for usernames and passwords
121–130 of 138 posts
Re: SQRL - Replacement for usernames and passwords
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
An ad hominem attack would be attacking him for unrelated traits, i.e. "we can't trust people with blue eyes!" I believe his history as a snake oil salesman is highly relevant to his current "security" work.
It's still an ad hominem - the merits of his argument should stand independent to who he is or his history on any topic. Doesn't mean it's not worth talking about, though. After all, science is entirely founded on a kind of inductive reasoning, so logical fallacies aren't crazy to consider.
It may not be as strong an argument as, say, going through the crypto with a fine-tooth comb and finding flaws. However, I'm not qualified to do that, and most of the people commenting here aren't, either. Even so, we might have to make a decision about going forward with the information we have.
Bringing the quality of a person's previous work into the discussion is a necessary shortcut. We can't all be expected to have expert-level knowledge on everything.
Re: SQRL - Replacement for usernames and passwords
#123This looks like a much less polished version of Clef ( https://getclef.com/ ). Clef is a really awesome app and they're already powering this type of integration for a few hundred websites. One of the founders is an HN regular, although I can't remember his username (Jesse, reply if you see this).
That's me, thanks! We're glad you think we have a little more polish, but to be honest, we're really excited about any replacement to passwords making waves in the tech world. Ultimately, no single group is going to be able to tackle this problem alone, so the more critical thought we have, the better off we all are. If anyone has any questions about Clef, I'd be happy to answer them, but I also don't want to distrac…
How does this work for mobile sites? This looks great for using your phone to login on the desktop, but how do you use your phone to login on the phone? I'd love to push this where I work, but I don't think it will fly if it doesn't work on the mobile site.
Re: SQRL - Replacement for usernames and passwords
#124I think this is pretty the same thing as storing a secure cookie?
Except the 'cookie' is the private key on the phone, so it's tied to the phone not to a particular browser.
Other than that, I don't see a difference between the two?
I think this is basically a long-lived session cookie, stored out-of-band.
I also don't see how the public/private keypair changes anything. Why not just store the nonce on the phone? If the nonce has only ever gone over https to the user, no-one else will know it.
Re: SQRL - Replacement for usernames and passwords
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
> generating random 512 bit keys do not guarantee never having same ID. It's just quite unlikely. Truly random 512 bit keys will never repeat, ever, under any circumstances. Seriously, they won't.
I'd be careful if I were you. Cryptography and cryptographers are an odd bunch. "Never" literally means never, while in your comment "never" means not in our life times, or a thousand, or billions of years. In case of infinite time, 512-bit RNG'ed numbers have to repeat at some point in time. You may consider this pedantism, but it's this pedantism and conservativeness that calls AES broken today.
There is no such thing that could never happen again under that thought process. Google Boltzmann brain to see what I mean.
If never is to have any meaning at all, it is in situations like this.
Re: SQRL - Replacement for usernames and passwords
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
> generating random 512 bit keys do not guarantee never having same ID. It's just quite unlikely. Truly random 512 bit keys will never repeat, ever, under any circumstances. Seriously, they won't.
I'd be careful if I were you. Cryptography and cryptographers are an odd bunch. "Never" literally means never, while in your comment "never" means not in our life times, or a thousand, or billions of years. In case of infinite time, 512-bit RNG'ed numbers have to repeat at some point in time. You may consider this pedantism, but it's this pedantism and conservativeness that calls AES broken today.
I think, from a practical standpoint, if "never" means "never before the heat death of the universe" then I'd be pretty satisfied. Pure math is truly wonderful (I love theoretical stuff) but at some point it does have to shift back to the practical realm.
Re: SQRL - Replacement for usernames and passwords
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Well, it's not really 2-factor is it?" Whatever you use to unlock/authenticate to the device would be the other factor.
What? So then when I log in to my bank it's really 3-factor?
Possibly. If the bank used a 'security picture' after the QR Code step.
Re: SQRL - Replacement for usernames and passwords
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's me, thanks! We're glad you think we have a little more polish, but to be honest, we're really excited about any replacement to passwords making waves in the tech world. Ultimately, no single group is going to be able to tackle this problem alone, so the more critical thought we have, the better off we all are. If anyone has any questions about Clef, I'd be happy to answer them, but I also don't want to distrac…
How does this work for mobile sites? This looks great for using your phone to login on the desktop, but how do you use your phone to login on the phone? I'd love to push this where I work, but I don't think it will fly if it doesn't work on the mobile site.
When you click the button, you'll just be redirected to the app where you can confirm or deny the login. If you confirm, you'll be redirected back and logged in.
We thought about building a mirror contraption that would allow you to scan the code on your own phone...sarcasm
send me an email, I'd love to help convince your workplace to integrate.
Re: SQRL - Replacement for usernames and passwords
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd be careful if I were you. Cryptography and cryptographers are an odd bunch. "Never" literally means never, while in your comment "never" means not in our life times, or a thousand, or billions of years. In case of infinite time, 512-bit RNG'ed numbers have to repeat at some point in time. You may consider this pedantism, but it's this pedantism and conservativeness that calls AES broken today.
There is no such thing that could never happen again under that thought process. Google Boltzmann brain to see what I mean. If never is to have any meaning at all, it is in situations like this.
There is one thing that could never happen. Something that's mathematically perfect fits that criteria - the One Time Pad. Even at actual infinite available time frames i.e. you travelling at the speed of light, with quantum computer on board your ship powered by the unobtainium drive, even with that sort of time frame, you shall never be able to decrypt the correct message.
Re: SQRL - Replacement for usernames and passwords
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd be careful if I were you. Cryptography and cryptographers are an odd bunch. "Never" literally means never, while in your comment "never" means not in our life times, or a thousand, or billions of years. In case of infinite time, 512-bit RNG'ed numbers have to repeat at some point in time. You may consider this pedantism, but it's this pedantism and conservativeness that calls AES broken today.
I think, from a practical standpoint, if "never" means "never before the heat death of the universe" then I'd be pretty satisfied. Pure math is truly wonderful (I love theoretical stuff) but at some point it does have to shift back to the practical realm.
I agree with you. I was just informing the parent poster how differently cryptographers see the world as compared to us normal people.
Although, in some respects, I do get where they're coming from. New algorithms and computing paradigms develop that make the previous one broken. I'm just guessing here, but it maybe possible that probabilistic computers and awesome algorithms a few decades down the line are able to recover states of a CSPRNG by applying statistical techniques. Obviously, I'm way over my head here but this is a possibility.
If you say that the OP was talking about TRNGs then all bets are off. It could so happen that two consecutive 512-bits are exactly the same. The probability is extremely low (birthday low) but since it's a TRNG there's still a chance that it will happen.