On Friday, March 15, 2019 at 12:25:37 PM UTC-7, ad...@adamcaudill.com wrote:
> Daymion,
> 
> (Apologies in advance if I've missed something that led to these results. 
> These results rely on the crt.sh database, which I will admit to being less 
> familiar with than I would like.)
> 
> While recently looking at some randomly selected recent certificates from 
> this CA: https://crt.sh/?CAID=904, I noticed that it seemed that all had 
> serial numbers with the high bit set. This being unlikely, I took advantage 
> of the fact that crt.sh allows direct database access to get some more data - 
> and it looks like for several days, the certificates logged did indeed have 
> the high bit set in the serial number.
> 
> For certificates with a notBefore of 2019-03-07 22:52:51 to 2019-03-13 
> 02:01:15, it appears that all certificates had a serial number with the high 
> bit set; there are a little under 100,000 entries in the crt.sh database with 
> notBefore between those dates, all appear to be encoded to 9 bytes and with 
> the high bit set.
> 
> For certificates with notBefore of 2019-03-13 02:01:16 and later, it appears 
> that the distribution returns to what would be expected based on the 
> selection criteria described.
> 
> The odds of this happening by random chance being extremely remote - this 
> seems to indicate that there may have been an issue (and a loss of entropy).
> 
> The data was pulled from the public crt.sh database, one day at a time, using 
> the following query:
> 
> select
>   c.id,
>   x509_notBefore(c.CERTIFICATE),
>   x509_serialNumber(c.CERTIFICATE)
> from certificate c
> where
>   c.issuer_ca_id = 904
>   and x509_notBefore(c.CERTIFICATE) between '2019-03-08'::date and 
> '2019-03-09'::date
> limit 100000;
> 
> On Wednesday, March 13, 2019 at 8:17:00 PM UTC-4, Daymion Reynolds wrote:
> 
> > In accordance with our conversations to date, prior to 3/7 6:30pm AZ we 
> > utilized raw 64 bit output from CSPRING, with uniqueness and non zero 
> > checks. This new understanding of the rules calls for us to modify our 
> > original disclosure to 0 affected certificates.

Please read through earlier posts discussing this.
_______________________________________________
dev-security-policy mailing list
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy

Reply via email to