Live data from Hacker News

Cracking a 512-bit DKIM key for less than $8 in the cloud

dmarcchecker.app

341–350 of 433 posts

Re: Cracking a 512-bit DKIM key for less than $8 in the cloud

#341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An email exchange has two users: one is the sender, the other the receiver. As the receiver, having proof that I received an email from you is potentially a feature, not a problem. More generally, authenticated communication has a long history of being considered a useful thing for society. Physical mail includes delivery confirmations where the receiver must sign for the receipt, proving to anyone that they did rece…

It would then make sense to encrypt the email content. Repudiation of clear text messages looks like the easier implementation.

That creates other problems. Content analysis is a large part of anti-spam. Which is a much more important problem than (non-)repudiation and all that.

Re: Cracking a 512-bit DKIM key for less than $8 in the cloud

#342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

X25519 has seen broad adoption (in the key exchange). Ed25519 has not, you can't actually use an Ed25519 certificate on the web. It's in a deadlock between CAs, browsers and TPM manufacturers (and to some extent NIST, because Ed25519 has not been approved by them). It's not being blocked per se, you can use it mostly (98%) without any issues. Though things like Amazon SES incorrectly reject letters with multiple sign…

> (and to some extent NIST, because Ed25519 has not been approved by them). Ed25519 (and Ed448) have been approved for use in FIPS 186-5 as of February 2023: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EdDSA#Standardization_and_impl...

Oh, great to know. That gives me hope that we'll see Ed25519 certificates at some point then.

Re: Cracking a 512-bit DKIM key for less than $8 in the cloud

#343
post #231
post #6

Could someone help me understand why we're not dramatically ramping up key sizes across the board on all encryption? Not as a solution, but as a buy-some-time measure. Compute is rapidly increasing, there is continuous chatter about quantum and yet everyone seems to be just staring at their belly buttons. Obviously bigger keys are more expensive in compute, but we've got more too...why only use it on the cracking sid…

"dramatically ramping up key sizes" is not done, because it's overly expensive, and not needed. What people don't realize: key size recommendations are surprisingly stable over long timeframes, and have not changed for a very long time. In the early 2000s, some cryptographers started warning that 1024 bit RSA is no longer secure enough, and in the following years, recommendations have been updated to 2048 bit minimum…

> That's now been a stable recommendation for over 20 years, and there's not the slightest sign that 2048 bit can be broken any time soon.

Except that now the recommendation by NIST at least is to switch to 2048-bit by 2030 and then deprecate RSA altogether by 2035.

But yeah, not being on at least 1024-bit RSA is weird and careless.

Re: Cracking a 512-bit DKIM key for less than $8 in the cloud

#344
post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you crack someone's key, they might be well within their rights to pursue a criminal prosecution. If that were true there would be no market for white hat hackers collecting bug bounties. You need to be able to demonstrate cracking the working system for that to be of any use at all. No company will listen to your theoretical bug exploit, but show them that you can actually break their system and they will pay y…

Bug bounties are a form of consent for testing and usually come with prescribed limits. Prescribed or not, actually getting user data tends to be a huge no go. Sometimes it can happen inadvertently, and when that happens it's best to have logs or evidence that can demonstrate you haven't looked at it or copied it beyond the inadvertent disclosure. But to pursue data deliberately crosses a bright line, and is not nece…

> I would be very very careful.

I see it the other way around. If some hacker contacted me and proved they had cracked my businesses encryption keys and was looking for a reward, I dont think I would be looking to prosecute them and antagonise them further.

Re: Cracking a 512-bit DKIM key for less than $8 in the cloud

#345
post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the article, and I don't think it changes it. If you crack someone's key, they might be well within their rights to pursue a criminal prosecution. Of course it would also have a Streisand effect and there's reasons not to, but I personally wouldn't allow or recommend a security researcher to do it. It's needlessly risky. In general, subverting security and privacy controls tends to be illegal in most jurisdict…

> If you crack someone's key, they might be well within their rights to pursue a criminal prosecution. If that were true there would be no market for white hat hackers collecting bug bounties. You need to be able to demonstrate cracking the working system for that to be of any use at all. No company will listen to your theoretical bug exploit, but show them that you can actually break their system and they will pay y…

What is or isn't illegal depends on where you live. Where I live, using any kind of digital secret to do something you shouldn't be doing is technically illegal. Guessing admin/admin or guest/guest is illegal, even if they're public knowledge, as long as you could reasonably know you're not supposed to log in.

Generally, law enforcement and judges don't blame you as long as you use best practices, but you need to adhere to responsible disclosure very strictly in order for this not to be something the police might take an interest in.

Demonstrating the insecurity of a 512 bit key is easy to do without cracking a real life key someone else owns; just generate your own to show it can be done, then use that as proof when reporting these issues to other companies. The best legal method may be to only start cracking real keys if they ignore you or deny the vulnerability, or simply report on the fact you can do it and that the company/companies you've reached out to deny the security risk.

Companies that pay for disclosure won't get you into trouble either way, but companies that are run by incompetent people will panic and turn to law enforcement quickly. White-hat hackers get sued and arrested all the time. You may be able to prove you're right in the court room, but at that point you've already spent a ton of money on lawyers and court fees.

In this case, the risk is increased by not only cracking the key (which can be argued is enough proof already, just send them their own private key as proof), but also using it to impersonate them to several mail providers to check which ones accept the cracked key. That last step could've easily been done by using one's own domains, and with impersonation being a last resort to prove an issue is valid if the company you're reporting the issue to denies the risk.

Re: Cracking a 512-bit DKIM key for less than $8 in the cloud

#346
post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you crack someone's key, they might be well within their rights to pursue a criminal prosecution. If that were true there would be no market for white hat hackers collecting bug bounties. You need to be able to demonstrate cracking the working system for that to be of any use at all. No company will listen to your theoretical bug exploit, but show them that you can actually break their system and they will pay y…

What is or isn't illegal depends on where you live. Where I live, using any kind of digital secret to do something you shouldn't be doing is technically illegal. Guessing admin/admin or guest/guest is illegal, even if they're public knowledge, as long as you could reasonably know you're not supposed to log in. Generally, law enforcement and judges don't blame you as long as you use best practices, but you need to adh…

> Demonstrating the insecurity of a 512 bit key is easy to do without cracking a real life key someone else owns; just generate your own to show it can be done

As I said in my post, no company will listen to your hypothetical exploit. Show them youve hacked their system and they listen.

Re: Cracking a 512-bit DKIM key for less than $8 in the cloud

#347
post #325
post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats because those are mostly developing countries which were late to the internet party, and are accessed mainly through mobile. Phone # could well be a replacement for email globally in the future, once all the younger generation grow up and rule the world.

Users in those countries already vastly outnumber users in other countries. And are growing much, much faster too.

Yep, but it will never replace email address as universal identifier until it is adopted by all.

In addition to that, reports show that the majority of Asian and African users access the internet via a shared device. Therefore phone number cannot be a universal identifier there as it generally identifies a group of people rather than in indivdual. This is why google and outlook accounts with SSO are still generally the most used identifying systems in the world.

Re: Cracking a 512-bit DKIM key for less than $8 in the cloud

#348
post #347
post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Users in those countries already vastly outnumber users in other countries. And are growing much, much faster too.

Yep, but it will never replace email address as universal identifier until it is adopted by all. In addition to that, reports show that the majority of Asian and African users access the internet via a shared device. Therefore phone number cannot be a universal identifier there as it generally identifies a group of people rather than in indivdual. This is why google and outlook accounts with SSO are still generally t…

By what metric?

In India, it is exceptionally rare for any services (gov’t and commercial) to use email address. They use mobile.

One of many examples [https://web.umang.gov.in/landing/department/aadhaar.html]

That accounts for 1.3+ billion distinct accounts in 2023 right there.

[https://uidai.gov.in/en/about-uidai/unique-identification-au...]

Do you think those folks in Asia and Africa sharing mobile devices have email accounts they can use instead?

Re: Cracking a 512-bit DKIM key for less than $8 in the cloud

#349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

dns server limitations. txt records are 1024bits... add the prefix for the key and you get to use a larger key you must combine many txt records in a never ending comical interoperability issues. the first one usually being that your regional monopoly scoundrel, a.k.a. registrar, run a server which doesn't even allow more than one entry.

TXT records are 255 bytes or 2040 bits. This is plenty of space to support RSA-1024 keys even with a small prefix and after base64 encoding them. However, it is obviously not enough to support RSA-2048 which is the minimum recommended size according to NIST right now. It's also not quite enough even for RSA-1536 (not widely used) due to base64 expanding the key by 33%. There actually is a standard for adding more tha…

> but it can be tricky to configure properly on a name server.

I wouldn't say it is tricky with a good name server: for instance with bind just split the value into multiple quoted strings and it'll do the rest¹.

Though while it is well known, it doesn't seem to be well documented away from many forum posts discussing the matter: after a little searching I can't find reference to the issue in bind documentation or relevant RFCs. The RR format allows RDATA to be longer than 255 octets (RDLENGTH is an unsigned 16-bit value, not 8-bit) so presumably the limit is imposed by the zonefile format. The only reference to 255 octet limits in RFCs 1034 & 1035 is the length of a full name (with individual labels making up a name being limited to 63 octets).

Of course many UIs for editing zone files or other stored RR information, or other DNS management interfaces, might implement longer RDATA support in a worse way or not support longer RDATA values at all.

----

[1] I'm not sure what “the rest” is (I might look deeper later)

Re: Cracking a 512-bit DKIM key for less than $8 in the cloud

#350
post #334

Slight change of title. The leading "How" was dropped. Original: "How We Cracked a 512-Bit DKIM Key for Less Than $8 in the Cloud"

"How we X'd a Y" is a linkbait trope. We edited that in accordance with the site guidelines: " Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait ". https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Thanks for clarifying. Interestingly, in the guidelines, there's an example of where you _add_ "How" instead of removing it: "E.g. translate '10 Ways To Do X' to 'How To Do X'". That tripped me.
Post reply on HN