Private Key Redaction: Redux

Posted: Mon, 12 June 2023 | permalink | No comments

[Note: the original version of this post named the author of the referenced blog post, and the tone of my writing could be construed to be mocking or otherwise belittling them. While that was not my intention, I recognise that was a possible interpretation, and I have revised this post to remove identifying information and try to neutralise the tone. On the other hand, I have kept the identifying details of the domain involved, as there are entirely legitimate security concerns that result from the issues discussed in this post.]

I have spoken before about why it is tricky to redact private keys. Although that post demonstrated a real-world, presumably-used-in-the-wild private key, I’ve been made aware of commentary along the lines of this representative sample:

I find it hard to believe that anyone would take their actual production key and redact it for documentation. Does the author have evidence of this in practice, or did they see example keys and assume they were redacted production keys?

Well, buckle up, because today’s post is another real-world case study, with rather higher stakes than the previous example.

When Helping Hurts

Today’s case study begins with someone who attempted to do a very good thing: they wrote a blog post about using HashiCorp Vault to store certificates and their private keys. In his post, they included some “test” data, a certificate and a private key, which they redacted.

Unfortunately, they did not redact these very well. Each base64 “blob” has had one line replaced with all xs. Based on the steps I explained previously, it is relatively straightforward to retrieve the entire, intact private key.

From Bad to OMFG

Now, if this post author had, say, generated a fresh private key (after all, there’s no shortage of possible keys), that would not be worthy of a blog post. As you may surmise, that is not what happened.

After reconstructing the insufficiently-redacted private key, you end up with a key that has a SHA256 fingerprint (in hex) of:


Searching for certificates which use that key fingerprint, we find one result: a certificate for (and a bunch of other, related, domains, as subjectAltNames). As of the time of writing, that certificate is not marked as revoked, and appears to be the same certificate that is currently presented to visitors of that site.

This is, shall we say, not great.

Anyone in possession of this private key – which, I should emphasise, has presumably been public information since the post’s publication date of February 2023 – has the ability to completely transparently impersonate the sites listed in that certificate. That would provide an attacker with the ability to capture any data a user entered, such as personal information, passwords, or payment details, and also modify what the user’s browser received, including injecting malware or other unpleasantness.

In short, no good deed goes unpunished, and this attempt to educate the world at large about the benefits of secure key storage has instead published private key material. Remember, kids: friends don’t let friends post redacted private keys to the Internet.

Post a comment

All comments are held for moderation; markdown formatting accepted.

This is a honeypot form. Do not use this form unless you want to get your IP address blacklisted. Use the second form below for comments.
Name: (required)
E-mail: (required, not published)
Website: (optional)
Name: (required)
E-mail: (required, not published)
Website: (optional)