• Turret3857@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    Tell me you dont understand cybersec without telling me you dont understand cybersec

    • untakenusername@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I wouldn’t be surprised if someday in the next thousand years someone figures out how to reverse the SHA256 hash function or something. (And I know there’s an infinite number of possible theoretical inputs that can result in the same hash, but maybe they’d just pick the shortest or something)

      RSA seemed pretty strong until shors algorithm and all the other quantum nonsense came around, and I don’t think they’ve got enough quantum computers yet to render it powerless, but its also not unreasonable to think that eventually all modern encryption will be obsolete

    • NotAGamer
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      Encryption can be hack you nutter.

        • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 days ago

          There are several ways. There could be a vulnerability in one of the underlying algorithms, in the crypto system, or in the implementation.

          I’m not saying signal isn’t secure, but encryption can absolutely be hacked.

          • Turret3857@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            2 days ago

            The point of my comment was not to say it couldn’t, it was to see if the OP of the comment knew anything about what they were talking about or if they were just spreading FUD. I know that it could happen, but saying that because it could happen means it did happen is a fools argument that I was curious to see what the response would be.