Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | andiw's commentslogin

Can someone help me understand this recommendation:

Under symmetric encryption, the authors write:

> If you are in a position to use a key management system (KMS), then you should use KMS. If you are not in a position to use KMS, then you should use authenticated encryption with associated data (AEAD).

These seem orthogonal to me. KMS := how keys are generated and distributed to communication partners. AEAD := how data is encrypted between communication partners using those keys.

How can it be “use a KMS if you can _or else_ use AEAD”? Shouldn’t it be “and”? What am I missing?


I think this was copied from Latacora’s cryptographic right answers without some of the necessary context. It’s specifically talking about the KMS offerings from AWS/Google Cloud, which provide trusted hardware implementations of not just key management, but also symmetric/asymmetric encryption, HMAC, etc. All the symmetric constructions provided by these platforms are AEADs, so the point is, if you’re using AWS’s KMS, don’t think about it, just use the default. Which is fairly sensible advice.


KMS is often used to store KEKs only, you'd still have to create and manage DEKs and use AEAD for actual data encryption.


Depends these days KMS also extends to solutions that provide full on encryption as a service such as Vault. If your design allows for a trusted and well vetted EAAS solution to be used that should be the first you go for.


It also goes on to say not to use Amazon or Google in the last section.

Fortunately there are good FOSS KMSes out there. I like Cloudflare's Red October: https://github.com/cloudflare/redoctober


Yep, also he likes to use conditional tense (would) in 'if' clauses, which is a typical language trap for German native speakers.


Do you mean sentences like

> Even if 90% of those 7,200 were mined by botnets, and 100% of those mined were sold, that would represent well under 10% of the daily trading volume.

This is a perfectly correct instance of the subjunctive mood (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive_mood), I think, not a language trap.


Not for me (US), I see a thanksgiving turkey. Oh well...


I get the turkey too. If you click his wing he cycles feather colors and hates and shoes.


Note, according to the original article (http://sony.nyleveia.com/2011/05/17/warning-all-psn-users-yo...) as well as this forum discussion (http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=430574), this is in fact a new vulnerability that is independent of the original PSN hack.

The problem seems to be that the email validation required for resetting the password could be circumvented. There is no detailed information in the posts how, but likely either the validation hash was generated in a insecure fashion, or the email address input was not properly sanitized and allowed piggybacking (CCing) a 2nd email address to receive the confirmation email.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: