mitmproxy adds --emudhra option

 (github.com)

117 points | by ahlCVA 1 hour ago

12 comments

  • Confiks 8 minutes ago
    It's almost a shame it includes the private key and doesn't bruteforce it in-band for every request.
  • shrubble 50 minutes ago
    If I’m understanding correctly, you could sniff the communication between your Smart TV and the manufacturer using this method?
    [-]
    • the_snooze 31 minutes ago
      As long as the smart TV still trusts eMudhra, then yeah. You'll want to super careful and prevent the TV from pulling updates that could revoke that trust.
    • kevin_nisbet 42 minutes ago
      Possibly. But some manufacturers may not have the full set of roots, use a private authority, or do certificate pinning.
    • quotemstr 43 minutes ago
      If the TV isn't older than a few years, if it's not checking CRLs, and if it hasn't yet patched itself.
  • seniorsassycat 44 minutes ago
    How much of a boon is this for jailbreaking, reverse engineering, and mitm really?
    [-]
    • bryancoxwell 4 minutes ago
      Been wondering this as well. I also don’t really understand the mitm to jailbreak pipeline
  • tecleandor 1 hour ago
    This is gonna be great to sniff apps in a couple older Android phones I have around. Hope they're not pinning certificates.
  • deadbabe 1 minute ago
    Can someone explain the significance here, a lot has happened in 24 hours.
  • wildmXranat 34 minutes ago
    Someone should've coined this disaster as "QuattroFail" to give it a little panache and international mystery
    [-]
    • gnabgib 27 minutes ago
      "4" was only some of the keys (they were all <256).. ByteFail seems more accurate
  • mintflow 22 minutes 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)
  • 0xbadcafebee 4 minutes ago
    [delayed]
  • skeledrew 46 minutes ago
    This is how fame happens.
  • xmcp123 21 minutes ago
    Never thought there would be a silver lining on this issue. Fuck yeah.
  • sippingabonedry 43 minutes 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".

    [-]
    • xuki 36 minutes ago
      Which iOS version? 27.0.1 here and they're all revoked for me.
      [-]
      • sippingabonedry 29 minutes ago
        26.7.1 still (randomly) trusts 2 out of the 12 compromised chains. All browsers impacted.

        Randomly because first it was one, then two after visiting the page again.

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

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

      • snailmailman 32 minutes 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.
  • DrammBA 59 minutes ago
    I love how someone's security disaster becomes someone else's feature.
    [-]
    • xp84 55 minutes 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 27 minutes 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

    • tonymet 52 minutes ago
      I seriously laughed at the flag. public wifi is going to be lit.