Practical bruteforce of military grade AES-1024 (2021) [video]
1–10 of 93 posts
Re: Practical bruteforce of military grade AES-1024 (2021) [video]
#2Isn't key derivation function completely separate from aes implementation. I mean you could have used the same broken key derivation with some other aes implementation.
Also aes-1024 sounds like some proprietary thingy, not something people should probably trust anyway...
Re: Practical bruteforce of military grade AES-1024 (2021) [video]
#3To be clear, this isn’t a break of AES itself, but the implementation of a whole system, of which AES is a part.
Re: Practical bruteforce of military grade AES-1024 (2021) [video]
#4[deleted]
Re: Practical bruteforce of military grade AES-1024 (2021) [video]
#5Isn't key derivation function completely separate from aes implementation. I mean you could have used the same broken key derivation with some other aes implementation. Also aes-1024 sounds like some proprietary thingy, not something people should probably trust anyway...
As far as I can see: yes and yes. Clickbait title.
Re: Practical bruteforce of military grade AES-1024 (2021) [video]
#6Isn't key derivation function completely separate from aes implementation. I mean you could have used the same broken key derivation with some other aes implementation. Also aes-1024 sounds like some proprietary thingy, not something people should probably trust anyway...
The complaint is that the user supplied password is easier to guess than it could be. A fast hash is used and not very many times. So you might have to, say, use 5 words rather than, say, 3 words in your diceware generated passphrase if you want to be secure against brute force attacks.
This ends up being a common usability issue whenever a user is asked to provide a passphrase for some sort of symmetrical encryption scheme. The user is almost never given any guidance to allow them to chose a passphrase strong enough for the system in use. So they end up with a dictionary word with a digit on the end and have no way to know that they have not actually protected anything. It ends up being sort of a con in practice. The user is allowed to believe that the system is much more convenient to use than it actually is.
The system under consideration is not really any worse than other things in this.
Re: Practical bruteforce of military grade AES-1024 (2021) [video]
#7Isn't key derivation function completely separate from aes implementation. I mean you could have used the same broken key derivation with some other aes implementation. Also aes-1024 sounds like some proprietary thingy, not something people should probably trust anyway...
It's definitely proprietary. In the summary below the video, it states:
> It turned out that the key derivation function was PBKDF2 using 1000 iteration of MD5 to derive the encryption key. The salt used to derive the keys is constant and hardcoded in all the solutions and all the vendors. This makes it easier for an attacker to guess the user password of a vault using time/memory tradeoff attack techniques such as rainbow tables and to re-use the tables to retrieve passwords for all users using the software. The implementation itself was incorrect and even with a randomly generated unique salt, it would be effortless to recover the password of a user.
I'd stick with veracrypt for now.
Re: Practical bruteforce of military grade AES-1024 (2021) [video]
#8The software in question: https://www.encsecurity.com/solutions.php
(Technically, the actual software in the USB is white-labeled with the USB flash drive brand, but apart from that this is it.)
Re: Practical bruteforce of military grade AES-1024 (2021) [video]
#9Isn't key derivation function completely separate from aes implementation. I mean you could have used the same broken key derivation with some other aes implementation. Also aes-1024 sounds like some proprietary thingy, not something people should probably trust anyway...
Agreed: 'Breaking the DataVault encryption software' would be a better title
Re: Practical bruteforce of military grade AES-1024 (2021) [video]
#10I've yet to see a good definition of what constitutes "military grade encryption" vs. regular old encryption. It generally has the opposite effect, for me at least, in the sense that I avoid any product that advertises "military grade ".
Edit: I'm not actually looking for definitions of "military grade encryption", thank-you everyone who tried to explain it though. I work in cybersec, and encryption is encryption. It is either compliant with standards or it is not. But "military grade" is pure marketing fluff, hence why I avoid it.