by Albuca on 8/7/14, 3:07 AM with 41 comments
by TeMPOraL on 8/7/14, 10:02 AM
Part of me is so hoping that they extracted those keys from the crooks using rubber-hose cryptanalysis. There are many types of Internet scams, some more evil than others, but this is one of the nastiest I ever heard of.
by nospecinterests on 8/7/14, 6:15 AM
by aresant on 8/7/14, 3:59 AM
That is awesome. I'm sure a large percentage of people with irreplaceable files hung onto them, hope these guys get the exposure they deserve for the site.
#1 on HN is a good start.
by mp4box on 8/7/14, 4:04 AM
by userbinator on 8/7/14, 5:05 AM
However, if on the other hand we allow the users freedom, and thus assume that mistakes (such as being infected with malware like this) will happen, then it makes sense that a means of recovery should be available, which is not something that "perfect" security allows. To use an analogy, people who have lost their keys or had them stolen should still be able to gain access to their house. In the physical world, perfect security is nearly impossible, but with digital data, it's not. Locking an item in a safe means it can still be retrieved if the key is lost by, in the worst possible circumstance, cutting open the safe, no matter how physically strong it is. Encrypting data with a long-enough key and sufficiently strong algorithm means it's truly practically destroyed without the key. I think this point - that encryption can be really, really, really unrecoverably strong - needs to be made more aware as we continue to use more of it.
It would be particularly ironic if this recovery was made possible through exploiting the malware servers with something like Heartbleed...
by RAB1138 on 8/7/14, 4:08 PM
by gordon_freeman on 8/7/14, 6:09 AM
by timsayshey on 8/7/14, 12:17 PM
If I have thousands of files, that will take forever, anyway to batch decrypt?
by xxxmadraxxx on 8/7/14, 5:55 AM
Maybe public/private key pairs aren't as secure as we've been lead to believe.