Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Security issues? #3269

Open
3 tasks done
bohwaz opened this issue Jan 15, 2025 · 3 comments
Open
3 tasks done

Security issues? #3269

bohwaz opened this issue Jan 15, 2025 · 3 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@bohwaz
Copy link

bohwaz commented Jan 15, 2025

Code of conduct

Self-training on how to write a bug report

Is there an existing issue for this?

  • I have searched the existing issues

Current Behavior

Hi there are some security issues raised here:
https://soatok.blog/2025/01/14/dont-use-session-signal-fork/

I haven't seen any other way to get these to the developers.

Expected Behavior

Steps To Reproduce

Desktop Version

Anything else?

@bohwaz bohwaz added the bug Something isn't working label Jan 15, 2025
@KeeJef
Copy link
Collaborator

KeeJef commented Jan 17, 2025

We've written up a full response here. In short, no these are not security issues. All of the "flaws" presented by the researcher are either plainly incorrect or misunderstandings of Session code or cryptography.

@soatok
Copy link

soatok commented Jan 20, 2025

We've written up a full response here. In short, no these are not security issues. All of the "flaws" presented by the researcher are either plainly incorrect or misunderstandings of Session code or cryptography.

EXTREMELY LOUD INCORRECT BUZZER

https://soatok.blog/2025/01/20/session-round-2/

@KeeJef
Copy link
Collaborator

KeeJef commented Jan 24, 2025

We've written up a full response here. In short, no these are not security issues. All of the "flaws" presented by the researcher are either plainly incorrect or misunderstandings of Session code or cryptography.

EXTREMELY LOUD INCORRECT BUZZER

https://soatok.blog/2025/01/20/session-round-2/

We have now updated our original blog post with a response to the PoC provided by the security researcher here https://getsession.org/blog/a-response-to-recent-claims-about-sessions-security-architecture . In short

  • The approach implemented in the PoC by the security researcher does not achieve any reduction in security for individual Session accounts. If attacking a single account, the proposed approach offers no advantage versus a traditional brute force attack against a 128 bit key, something which is impossible given current computing technology.
  • The security researchers PoC for a multi-target attack performs worse than a common benchmark algorithm for this type of attack, called a linear search.
  • When calculating a worst-case scenario for a multi-target attack on Session using linear search, we find that on average it would cost tens of thousands of times more power than the entire planet consumes in one year to compromize even a single random Session account out of 4 Billion + accounts—even when the parameters for such an attack are set very favorably for the attacker.
  • Given this Session Accounts remain secure against both specific and targeted attacks and multi-target or batch attacks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants