Well, all eight of the compromised certificates had keys which were < 256. So a really poor choice of range.

How could you prove it was not a fair random generation? It's totally possible.

	▲	deathanatos an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		It's not within the realm of believability. The chance of "human screwed up" astronomically exceeds this being fairly randomly chosen, and the Firefox bug states, (I think this is supposition, not known fact, but IDK) > The original key generation was flawed - rather than any issue with the produced signatures. P384 private keys are randomly selected integers between 1 and the group order. That is within the realm of believability.
	▲	jeffbee an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		When you have multiple selections you can show that the probability of selecting a set with a range much smaller than the population range is exponentially unlikely, strong evidence to reject the hypothesis that the subset was chosen at random. But when N=1 you can't conclude anything.