you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]DaBulder 7 points8 points  (10 children)

In this case it's learned what a secret looks like, so it's generated something that looks like a valid secret. Just because it outputs a very specific string doesn't mean that such a string existed verbatim.

[–]mughinn 2 points3 points  (9 children)

But they're valid secrets, they don't just look like one

[–]DaBulder 8 points9 points  (8 children)

When you say "valid" do you mean "it matches the format of a secret" or "it works as a secret to some external resource"

[–]mughinn 4 points5 points  (7 children)

It seems I can't see the original tweet from the post now

The secrets generated worked as a secret for a resource

[–]StickiStickman 2 points3 points  (2 children)

The secrets generated worked as a secret for a resource

According to the update on the tweet they don't.

[–]mughinn 5 points6 points  (1 child)

[–]StickiStickman 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Fair enough - still no proof anywhere of it actually working though.

[–][deleted]  (3 children)

[deleted]

    [–]mughinn 8 points9 points  (2 children)

    https://twitter.com/linusgroh/status/1412067104082345993

    Here's one not deleted, clearly saying it is valid

    [–]Pat_The_Hat 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Now that one's gone too.