Keygen from uret 010 editor code#
Keygen from uret 010 editor keygen#

Generate a random prime number P with chosen length.

It's based on the explanation in InfoSec Institute's tutorial. So, here's a short version, just enough to solve this keygenme. It's complex, it's confusing and unless you're prepared to study this field for years, you can't really understand why stuff works this or that way.

smile Crash-course in ElGamal signature scheme It was not solved for few weeks, so I decided to take a look at it.

Keygen from uret 010 editor keygen#

Keygen this son of a crypto nightmare and write a DETAILED tutorial!ġ) The only acceptable solution is a keygen Yet another company is making wild claims! Your mission: prove that people shouldn't trust companies promoting 'revolutionary' crypto algos. The description looked interesting enough: Some weeks ago I found a nice keygenme on URET forum. Print 'Serial for ' + userName + ' is ' + r.digits(16) + s.digits(16) M = mpz(hashlib.sha1(userName).hexdigest(), 16) # Generate new key just to prove it works. M1 = mpz(hashlib.sha1('ProThief').hexdigest(), 16) M0 = mpz(hashlib.sha1('LordCarder').hexdigest(), 16)

Keygen from uret 010 editor code#

So, I just took the code from those CTF writeups and added few more comments to it. Reused K and recovering private keyĪs I said earlier, cryptography is a dark magic - if you don't spend years studying it, you can't understand it. So, let's try to get something useful out of them. Unfortunately, normal person has no chance to understand that 'explanation'.įew Google searches later I found 2 writeups from Boston Key Party CTF 2015 which were slightly better: The problem of reusing k and the attack itself is explained in Stinson's 'Cryptography Theory And Practice', pages 290-291. In particular, if two messages are sent using the same value of k and the same key, then an attacker can compute x directly. Otherwise, an attacker may be able to deduce the secret key x with reduced difficulty, perhaps enough to allow a practical attack. The signer must be careful to choose a different k uniformly at random for each signature and to be certain that k, or even partial information about k, is not leaked. Quick look in Wikipedia confirms that it's a really bad idea: In this crackme, it's SHA1 of the username I'm sure you already remember the algorithm from my previous blog post.