Top
Best
New

Posted by ahlCVA 2 hours ago

mitmproxy adds --emudhra option(github.com)
181 points | 43 commentspage 2
mintflow 1 hour ago|
Haha, this is quite interesting to test if you need to update various of program (if they do not use the sys ca chain)
skeledrew 2 hours ago||
This is how fame happens.
maxlin 57 minutes ago|
infamy*
xp84 31 minutes ago||
They deserve every bit of it. Their name will be a synonym for sloppy security. "Oh shit, you got Emudhra'd"
deadbabe 1 hour ago||
Can someone explain the significance here, a lot has happened in 24 hours.
Gigachad 1 hour ago||
An Indian Certificate Authority was found to have a private key that’s literally the number 4. So using that you can sign valid https certs for anything that isn’t checking the revoked list.
brendoelfrendo 1 hour ago||
They had 8 intermediate certs with private keys under 1 byte (<256). The most egregious was 4, but any of those 8 were pitiful.
bombcar 40 minutes ago||
It would’ve almost been better if the eight keys were just 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
jolmg 1 hour ago||
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMudhra#2026_intermediate_cert...

> On October 17, 2026, browser root programs received a report that the private keys of eight eMudhra intermediate certificates had been compromised. The private keys were 4, 56, 66, 115, 155, 156, 230, and 237. A P-384 elliptic-curve private key normally has about 384 bits of entropy, but these keys had between 3 and 8 bits.

0xbadcafebee 1 hour ago||
Remember twenty years ago when tools like this were "controversial" because you could "just download it and hack anyone" ? Except the only systems you could hack were... insecure ones... so people updated their systems to resist the tools' attacks, and we all ended up more secure.
xmcp123 1 hour ago||
Never thought there would be a silver lining on this issue. Fuck yeah.
sippingabonedry 2 hours ago||
Wonderful.

Anyone else bother to notice iOS still trusts 2 of the forged certs on the test site? I'd like to politely know what the fuck is going on because this is far from being "fixed".

kccqzy 15 minutes ago||
Apple’s OCSP server may be overloaded?

I don’t know if possible on iOS but I remember multiple incidents where people recommended turning off CRL and OCSP on macOS to speed things up. That even used to be a setting in the GUI. https://i0.wp.com/i.imgur.com/XVHWCNz.png

sippingabonedry 4 minutes ago||
The individual CA's host the OCSP and CRLs, not Apple.

It's possible the Indian CA is overloaded.

My question is why the system trust store has not been updated to distrust the shady root CA?

robrain 45 minutes ago|||
Mine were all blocked this morning when I informed my family of the mitigation methods.

I've just been rechecking everything and both iOS and MacOS browsers (Safari and Orion tested) now accept one (for MacOS, 27.0.1) or three (for iOS, 27.0.1) of them. I know the revocation is not an OS update, just including the version number for completeness.

EDIT: iPadOS with the same browsers continues to pass the tests.

Further EDIT: iPadOS now accepts one of them. This has to be a load issue on the "got a problem site", surely? Maybe a check for a certificate error message that never hits because a timeout beats it?

sippingabonedry 13 minutes ago||
> Further EDIT: iPadOS now accepts one of them. This has to be a load issue on the "got a problem site", surely?

No, because it lets you successfully navigate to the forged CA test site.

You'll get a message to the effect of, "you shouldn't see this, this is bad"

Try clicking the link containing the CA's name for any that fail the test.

xuki 1 hour ago||
Which iOS version? 27.0.1 here and they're all revoked for me.
sippingabonedry 1 hour ago|||
26.7.1 still (randomly) trusts 2 out of the 12 compromised chains. All browsers impacted.

Edit: I'm not the only one with this issue:

https://www.reddit.com/r/iphone/comments/1xbvxgd/emudhra_cer...

My best guess is it's soft-failing on a failed OCSP lookup?

snailmailman 1 hour ago|||
FWIW i havent updated my ios, I'm on 26.6.2, and they all got revoked for me. The revocation shouldn't require an iOS update.
TYPE_FASTER 1 hour ago||
I’m on the same version, and according to https://emudhra.we-have-a-problem.com/ they have not been revoked for me. Maybe phased rollout.
DrammBA 2 hours ago|
I love how someone's security disaster becomes someone else's feature.
xp84 2 hours ago||
I agree. We may as well make some lemonade out of these lemons. IMHO the ability of companies to 'securely' close off hardware and software from their users is a sad casualty of the success of cryptography, and not a feature.
r3trohack3r 1 hour ago||
Most things have tradeoffs

At some point you’re forced to stack rank two or more of your values in a case where they’re mutually exclusive

Bratmon 1 hour ago|||
As the percentage of technology controlled by people actively using it to do evil increases, so does the net value to society of a trivially-expliotable zero-day.
tonymet 2 hours ago||
I seriously laughed at the flag. public wifi is going to be lit.
MajorTakeaway 1 hour ago||
What about using a VPN on public wifi?
thway15269037 40 minutes ago||
At places where I did work anything private over even properly protected wifi was forbidden after several wifi vulns in 2018. So the only thing available on company's wifi was vpn gateway and page with manual how to set it up.

So, not trusting anything wireless is a thing for almost a decade.