Nostr Web Client

I hope not, nostr:npub14hlzw4sywt23drreaqs8ruf00dsrnnv5hfnyu49g2hpheq836umssur6nl and I have sent 7 trillion.. may as well post my nsec. 😂😂😂

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

saaaaaaaame

so fucked if true lmao

Time to bring in the big guns 👀

nostr:npub12262qa4uhw7u8gdwlgmntqtv7aye8vdcmvszkqwgs0zchel6mz7s6cgrkj how faked are we?

nostr:npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6 any ideas on this?

You sent 7 trillion DMs to Lauren?? Wtf is going on over there??? 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

Yes. Me and Tatata DM all ze time 🥹🥹🥹🧡🫂

I’ll allow it

similaaaaaaar*

doesn't have the same ring to it innit

but yes, yes we hab, 21 trillion even

Hmmmmm do you ask her questions like this?

Yezz. We sned cat pictures and smol animals and tard shit 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

You send each other cat pictures?? Hmmmmmm my interest has been peaked.. logging in on your nsec. 😂😂😂😂😂. I wanna see some 🐱

*Piqued*

Hue wish 😂😂😂

I've been on nostr a year and a half and only today I begin seeing the deepest darkest corners of it

big if true tho

u said no hard claim still, just erring to paranoia right

https://github.com/nostr-protocol/nips/pull/715#issuecomment-1675301250

ye i dont speak that language idk what to do w it just referring to your earlier message

I’m assuming that’s bad

Buttholid 😂😂😂

just copy-pasta’d the whole thing into chatgpt, with this in front of it “explain this as if i was astonishingly uneducated:”

😂😂😂

pukka 2y ago

🤣

🤗

haven’t edited, actual subtitles™

no₿ody™ 🧱 2y ago

Well what did it say?? 😰

Sure, I'll explain it in simpler terms. Imagine we're talking about making changes to something important, like a lock on a door that many people use. We want to make sure the lock is strong and secure.

1. One of the ideas being discussed is about how this lock works. Right now, it might not be as secure as we'd like. There's a risk that if we keep using it as it is, it could be easier for someone with bad intentions to figure out how it works. We have a way to make it safer, but it involves some changes to the lock.

2. Another issue is about the way the lock is set up. Right now, the way it's set up could make it easier for someone to break in. We need to make sure the lock is set up in a way that's really hard for people to predict.

3. The lock also has some problems when it's used a lot. The more it's used, the less secure it becomes. If we use it a lot, like thousands of times, it could become very easy for someone to break it.

4. People have already found ways to break this kind of lock in the past, and not all locks are checked properly to make sure they're secure.

5. Finally, the way this lock was designed is based on some assumptions, but those assumptions might not be true in reality. This means the lock could be vulnerable to unknown attacks, making it less safe.

So, the question is, should we keep using this lock the way it is, even though it might not be very safe, or should we make some changes to try to make it more secure? That's what's being discussed.

Can hue blz explain dis in tard form? 👀

Your private key (nsec) is simply a random number. If someone guesses that random number, they have your private key.

The claim here is that every time you send a DM, it makes it easier to guess what that number is.

I gathered as much. Shit. Not great.

It doesn’t make sense though, the shared secret is used for encryption. If anything there could be a flaw that leaks the shared secret over time (of some mechanism which I don’t understand), but this shared secret is derived from ECDH. I see no way how the encryption part could leak anything about the original private keys unless something was seriously broken.

hodlbod 2y ago

I think Paul said it was because we weren't hashing the shared point, so it reduces the entropy on the original key

ECDH shared secrets reduce entropy on the original key? Wouldn’t this break ECDH ? Couldn’t you create billions of keys to reduce entropy? How does hashing help in this case ? Not adding up for me.

hodlbod 2y ago

I don't know anything, but here's what GPT has to say:

The raw shared secret generated from ECDH should not be used directly as a cryptographic key for a couple of reasons:

Predictability: The raw shared secret's value range can be somewhat predictable, especially the beginning and end parts of the secret. This predictability can reduce the entropy of the secret, making it a less secure choice for cryptographic operations.

Purpose Differentiation: Without some form of derivation or hashing, the same shared secret will always lead to the same key. This can be problematic if you need different keys for different purposes (e.g., encryption vs. authentication).

To mitigate these concerns, it's a common and recommended practice to use a key derivation function (KDF) after obtaining the ECDH shared secret. The KDF can use cryptographic hash functions, like SHA-256 or SHA-3, to derive a more uniform and unpredictable key from the shared secret.

guh

Specifically the shared secret, not the private keys. Even if this is true, its still extraordinary unlikely that you could guess the shared secret, and the damage would be limited to the convo between two people.

The claim that DMs will leak your private key is utterly false.

Does this mean the worst possible case is it only affects that particular conversation instance?

yes this is how I interpreted it, because the shared secret is the only secret involved during encryption. So when people say “dms will leak your private key!” I assumed they meant shared secret. If shared secret could leak private key that would be pretty bad and ECDH would be insecure.

nobody 2y ago

This risk is further reduced if relays start putting DMs behind AUTH too, isn’t it?

That is an anti-pattern

Ser

nobody 2y ago

Exposing sensitive data to fewer people is an anti-pattern? 🤨

The entire concept of broadcasting sensitive 1:1 communication to the whole world would seem to be the antipattern.

hodlbod 2y ago

That's better than I thought. The main vulnerability would then be encryption to self since that's done more frequently. But you could use ephemeral keys as a nonce to generate a bogus shared secret.

AfroLucy 2y ago

@DM Leaks Don’t assume because of false assumption rather validate or confirm especially in Age of endless Spam/Scam not only by Fiat paid trolls but also unpaid AI bots for example, there is no such thing a shared secrets including Top Secret where security 3 dimension is about Access rather shared intelligence even in quantum entanglement there is transparency not security like 4 dimension since the piece is part of whole no separation like law of One unlike divorce divided by secrecy cheat means more than one or lack of oneness (unity) by self custody metaphor not your coin not your keys like private key.

so the first and last couple of values of the shared secret string are exposed.. they don't get more exposed then that the more you chat, no? people will still have to try and guess the rest?

so is the danger perhaps that the more you dm, the more you expose yourself in a database for being a target for breach? or is it something deeper?

nostr:npub12262qa4uhw7u8gdwlgmntqtv7aye8vdcmvszkqwgs0zchel6mz7s6cgrkj maybe u noh? i try to do big brain here, need halp

Steven Day 2y ago

I’m assuming that DMs use asymmetric encryption.

Doesn’t that mean that if I send you a DM I’m encrypting it with your public key so you can decrypt it with your private key and vice versa.

If usage were to help with guessing the nsec couldn’t someone just constantly use my pubkey to encrypt data until they could “guess the number”. The decryption of the data happens “off network”.

Maybe I’m misunderstanding how DMs work but that’s what I originally thought.

captain ☦️ 2y ago

Hey nostr:npub1gcxzte5zlkncx26j68ez60fzkvtkm9e0vrwdcvsjakxf9mu9qewqlfnj5z, does this vulnerability apply with other things that get encrypted, like the mute list every time you block someone in #Amethyst ?