The attacker would need physical possession of the YubiKey, Security Key, or YubiHSM, knowledge of the accounts they want to target and specialized equipment to perform the necessary attack. Depending on the use case, the attacker may also require additional knowledge including username, PIN, account password, or authentication key.
The attacks require about $11,000 worth of equipment and a sophisticated understanding of electrical and cryptographic engineering. The difficulty of the attack means it would likely be carried out only by nation-states or other entities with comparable resources and then only in highly targeted scenarios. The likelihood of such an attack being used widely in the wild is extremely low.
Given this massive caveat I’d almost call that headline misleading
I would argue that if the attacker has physical possession of my yubikey, that alone means the accounts tied to it are vulnerable. While the information isn’t technically wrong, I feel like that headline is misleading and this isn’t as big of a deal as some would like to make it out as.
Given this massive caveat I’d almost call that headline misleading
I would argue that if the attacker has physical possession of my yubikey, that alone means the accounts tied to it are vulnerable. While the information isn’t technically wrong, I feel like that headline is misleading and this isn’t as big of a deal as some would like to make it out as.
Cheaper just to beat you until you give them what they want.
The fact that this happened is surprising in general, but not super practical.
What’s the big deal? A: It affects other types of hardware which also used these crypto libraries. Some are easier to address than others.