11 comments

[ 1.2 ms ] story [ 5.4 ms ] thread
Never attribute to malice what can be explained by ignorance?

In this case I wonder if this was an intentional wide open doorway to fraud

This wasnt malice its was laziness.

They literally were too lazy to type more than just a single '4'.

Either that or they intentionally wanted to create a publicly-accessible backdoor, with plausible deniability of laziness
(comment deleted)
I thought CAs automatically filtered out really low keys. There's a great Suckerpinch video (https://youtu.be/M1si1y5lvkk) about trying to purposely make the least secure HTTPS page possible, and Tom initially tried to choose a laughably-low number as the key, but the CA automatically rejected it.
think the key is actually long, it's just a bunch of 0s first.. 0000..4