That lock is missing 112 more dials, all set to zero.

Damn, I gotta get a better lock..

901901901345

It's interesting since 0004 is technically just as random as any other lock combination on paper. If you choose a random number between 0000 and 9999, every number has the same chance.

Same with the private key of 4. It was still 47 bytes of 0 and one byte of 4 as storage for P-384.

So if you randomly tested keys, you would take as long to find it on average as any other key.

The problem is that, similar to cracking a number lock, one of the things to check first is weak patterns. This means people on a number lock would start at 0000 and turn one dial. Simlar things happened with the certificates afaik. Someone checked if those certs keys were any low integer and indeed they were.

Ah yes nothing makes a joke funnier than explaining it with captions.

In my experience checking other people's locks, if they're going to change 1 tumbler they change the first one or the last one. Never any of the ones in the middle. It's usually the one on the top.

That applies to both changing the code and securing the lock.

This comment is sarcasm, the user is remarking at how NOT funny that is. Just in case anyone was confused.

I would be happy if somebody would explain it to me...

IYKYK

A 116 dial lock set to 000….4 is more secure than a lock with a single digit that is 4 which is what is being referred to.

116 dials required to be SET is still secure.

I'm pretty sure you're supposed to choose two large primes and multiply them. Setting them both to "2", I think, defeats the purpose.

Shit! Not padlocks too!

LOL, no worries, this is one of those mechanically programmable locks, I can change the combination to anything from 0000 to 9999.

ThioJoe just posted a video where he explains the situation...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wxX1Vo30h4

I can confirm! Mine have numbers other than 0 or 4!

true.dat! so i guess it has 3 too many dials.

yes, they need to "use" all digits. which kinda means the first digit is a one and the rest could be 00...4 again, bit at least i makes you use an actual rng generator and not an academic example.