Free Github SSH keys anyone?(github.com)
github.com
Free Github SSH keys anyone?
https://github.com/search?q=path%3A.ssh%2Fid_rsa
11 comments
And remember folks, just deleting the file doesn't solve the problem, because this is a version control system.
Github has published instructions on how to actually purge sensitive data that's been accidentally committed: https://help.github.com/articles/remove-sensitive-data
Github has published instructions on how to actually purge sensitive data that's been accidentally committed: https://help.github.com/articles/remove-sensitive-data
We need a cross reference between this and Facebook graph search. For science.
(I flagged, also, because this should be told to the guys at Github, not out in the open.)
Oh, and of course, Google indexes them. Fantastic.
(I flagged, also, because this should be told to the guys at Github, not out in the open.)
Oh, and of course, Google indexes them. Fantastic.
I shot github an email when the feature was first released their stance is that what is out in public, is out in public.
[deleted]
This isn't new, presumably anyone who cared to exploit it would have already thought of:
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Agithub.com+inurl%3A.s...
Same thing, right?
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Agithub.com+inurl%3A.s...
Same thing, right?
This is a big WTF moment for me. There are a ton of private keys here. I don't even know what else to say.
How exactly does this happen? I can understand that some people don't understand the need to keep their private key offline, but I would have thought those people aren't really aware of the existence of the private key...so how does it end up in a github repo?
[deleted]
Alternate source:
https://www.google.com/search?q=BEGIN+RSA+PRIVATE+KEY&as...
I almost can't believe someone would commit their .ssh directory to a public GitHub repo.
Seriously - why? Your public key, sure, but the entire directory?
Seriously - why? Your public key, sure, but the entire directory?
In all likelihood, these are NOT the user's private SSH keys, but a key generated for the service that the user is developing - such as a key to run backups and issue remote commands. Thus I can well see that the key could be committed as part of an application stack.
No, some of these repositories are user's dotfiles. See this for example, https://github.com/gomachan/dotfiles
There are many examples like this.
There are many examples like this.
I purpose a corollary to Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by ignorance?
ignorance is almost always the explanation
The authorized_keys and known_hosts are nice to be able to share across machines.
But of course you also want to be real careful about authenticating them (a signed tag in Git can serve that purpose).
But of course you also want to be real careful about authenticating them (a signed tag in Git can serve that purpose).
It would be interesting to find out what % are password-protected.
edit: In fact, they should probably run a full search for such files now and email a heads-up to users with repos that produce hits.