Talk:eMudhra

Is this company notable independently of the event?

The event is clearly notable, but I'm wondering if this page should be titled 2026 eMudhra private key leak or something like that instead. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:27, 21 October 2026 (UTC)

I strongly support the proposed title. 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk / Uploads} 15:43, 21 October 2026 (UTC)

I suspect the company has a more significant history in India that can be written about, but I haven't found any sources yet. The company has existed since 2008 and I would be surprised if this incident is the only thing we can find. If the page would be moved to the 2026 incident, I would not support this specific title. I think "leak" is the wrong term, because of how easy it was to regenerate the keys by researchers. eMudhra weak private key incident would be more appropriate. PhotographyEdits (talk) 21:21, 21 October 2026 (UTC)

That title is fine with me. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:40, 21 October 2026 (UTC)

I used "eMudhra weak key incident" on Template:Hacking in the 2020s. Brandon (talk) 07:06, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

I like it, more concise. PhotographyEdits (talk) 09:55, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

Let's move it to eMudhra weak key incident, then? 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk / Uploads} 09:58, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

I would prefer to research the company a bit better before opening a move discussion. But I can't stop you from opening an RM discussion :-) PhotographyEdits (talk) 10:44, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

Many thanks to @QuillQuasar for doing this! :D PhotographyEdits (talk) 14:07, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome. Pre-2026 coverage is mostly routine (IPO, listing, credit ratings), so notability outside the incident looks borderline to me QuillQuasar (talk) 14:50, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

I think so too. Looks good enough to me :) PhotographyEdits (talk) 16:00, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

In the news?

Think we may suggest this to the folks at WikiNews/In the news. 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk / Uploads} 14:24, 21 October 2026 (UTC)

Encountered this Mezha.net piece - not an established source, but the title is humourous: eMudhra certificate keys compromised, including one that was simply "4". 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk / Uploads} 16:17, 21 October 2026 (UTC)

Project Paranoid claims

@TobyKohlhagen @IrisChronomia

The post from Wayne on dev-security-policy seems to originate from the Something Awful user "Wiggly Wayne DDS" of the long-running secfuck thread. Which is obviously hilarious. That said, I think it would be prudent to either address the absurdity of the situation directly or remove the attribution of Project Paranoid entirely. Laundering the claims of "Wiggly Wayne DDS from the secfuck thread" via "the Google Groups thread by Mozilla" is both less funny and in my opinion, misleading. Brandon (talk) 06:26, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

I actually have no idea. I just think to give due weight about "company messed up half the global Internet finger-pointing at somebody else being right possibly because of AI" is absurd. No comment on the latter part of the paragraph. 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk / Uploads} 06:27, 22 October 2026 (UTC)

Agreed, I think the finger-pointing at AI assistance is given undue weight. Both of the sources for that section are self-published and not reliable enough to say for sure what happened. Personally I think the AI claim is eMudhra trying to distract from their own error with the buzzword of the day. Perpetually Blooming Rose (talk) 13:32, 22 October 2026 (UTC)