Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

There is an argument that if:

- you are listening to an SSH session between devices

- and you know what protocol is being talked over the connection (i.e. what they are talking about)

- and the protocol is reasonably predictable

then you gain enough information about the plaintext to start extracting information about the cipher and keys.

It's a non-trivial attack by all means but it's totally feasible. Especially if there's some amount of observable state about the participants being leaked by a third party source (i.e. other services hosted by the participants involved in the same protocol).





this only works for manually typed text, not computer to computer communication where you can't deduce much from what is being "typed" as it's not typed but produced by a program to which every letter is the same and there is no different delay in sending some letters (as people have when typing by hand)

Well not necessarily. That's the thing. It's not the timing attack that makes data leak for automated/noninteractive tunnels. Well technically there is still some potential leak but the issue is more about if the data being transferred is predictable then you have the plaintext.

So for a contrived example: Say I know a tunnel is transferring a sizeable dataset starting at a specific time before performing some other tasks (say a data sync before doing XYZ). I know when the connection started and I have snooped on the entire connection.

I know the initial handshake and I know the exact plaintext being transferred. That's a lot of information that can be used to grind the keys being used. That then risks that you can extract whatever information that follows after your initial dataset and potentially impersonate a participant and inject your own messages.

It's unlikely to be exploited in practice because it requires a very particular set of circumstances but it's essentially a modern, more expensive version of the attacks used on the enigma machines back in the day. It's unlikely to be exploited on random people but it isn't out of the realm of possibilities for targeted attacks on particularly juicy adversaries or between nation state actors.


I'd love to hear more about this kind of attack being exploited in the wild. I understand it's theoretically possible, but...good luck! :)

You're guessing a cipher key by guessing typed characters with the only information being number of packets sent and the time they were sent at. Good luck. :)


I agree it is more nuanced than a simple 'good for computer-to-computer' and 'bad for person-to-computer'. I'm sure there are cases where both are wrong but I don't think that necessarily changes that it makes a reasonable baseline heuristic.



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

Search: