Peter N. M. Hansteen wrote: > ...One practical example - if you're used to seeing > > Host key fingerprint is 67:88:39:bd:7f:3c:df:a5:47:87:de:bd:9b:5e:7b:55 > > and one morning when you've had way too little coffee you may not > notice anything different if the machine greets you with
I'd be more worried about missing something like this Host key fingerprint is 67:88:39:bd:7f:3c:aa:92:42:87:de:bd:9b:5e:7b:55 It'd be more work, but doable. Can't say how practical to make such a fake. The visual host keys don't do it for me yet. It may, given enough time and exposure. The confound here is the time I spend doing simple 6502 assembly as well as be able to easily add, subtract and multiple hex in my head as a teenager. Was just working on division, when other things came up. I still find hex more convenient, but expect there would be even more resistance to a conversion than there was for metric. > +--[ RSA 1024]----+ > | ... .. | > | ... . o.. | > | .o ..o ... | > | ..o +.+ E | > | ..S.= . . | > | o.+ o | > | .o . | > | .. | > | .. | > +-----------------+ How make a similar key like the one below? Not necessarily that specific one, but simply one that resembles the real one fairly closely? +--[ RSA 1024]----+ | ... .. | | ... . o.. | | .o ..o ... | | ...o .+.+ E | | .S.= . . | | o+ o | | .o . | | .. | | .. | +-----------------+ Regards, -Lars
