I felt sorry for them

[turret3857@infosec.pub]

Alright I'll bite. Tell me how exactly you "hack" encryption

[quexotic@infosec.pub]

Can't wait till they get the ability to decrypt all the shit we've been sending over signal. Shits gonna get real interesting.

They're just storing that shit up, waiting for the day...

It'll be a bloodbath.

[zaphod@discuss.tchncs.de]

A billion? So at least every 8th human is an FBI agent. I ain't one

[ajen@sh.itjust.works]

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.

[soleinvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone]

[una@europe.pub]

You are actually 3 of them

[turret3857@infosec.pub]

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.

[xorollo@leminal.space]

[untakenusername@sh.itjust.works]

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

[untakenusername@sh.itjust.works]

only known method of hacking encryption