This thread is frustrating. Everyone seems more interested in nitpicking the specifics of what OP is saying and are ignoring that a forum sends you your password (not an automatically generated one) in an email on registration.

  • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    120
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Larian stated on their forum they fixed this behavior and shifted to https 3 years ago. When this was linked several times in thread, people asked OP when this screenshot occured, and OP ignored the questions. Pretty clear that this is a very old screenshot of what is now a non issue.

    What’s to discuss besides OP trying to stir up drama about issues that were resolved years ago?

    • Pyro@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      1 year ago

      this is a very old screenshot

      What do you mean? It says “0 minutes ago”! Clearly it’s very recent! /s

    • ono@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      FWIW, it’s not fixed. The screen shot may very well be recent.

      (The post in question was still bad reporting, though, for the reasons I detailed in my other comment here.)

  • oleorun@real.lemmy.fan
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    93
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just wow, yeah. Nothing should ever send you a password in cleartext - once that’s been done, a MITM attack’s success rate just went to 100%.

    It’s painless to use password resets if the person forgot the password. Never, ever should a password be in cleartext.

    hunter2

    • Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      An issue if you’re reusing passwords. If not, every forgot my password email is also vulnerable.

      A combination of bad practices could be… bad.

      Edit: apparently around the same time, their forum was also lacking https. This would be an even easier vector.

      • exal@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        (one-time)

        You make it sound like an irrelevant detail, but that’s kind of the key part. If implemented properly, it’s only valid once and for a short period of time, which greatly reduces risk.

        • nous@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well, the tokenized link is essentially a clear text one time password. Not really any better than just a one time password except for the convenience that the user does not need to type it in. If someone gets hold of the link or password before you they can get access to your account.

    • hascat@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Many years ago, I had forgotten my password to the Sprint websiteb so I could log in and pay my cellular bill. I had to call customer support to resolve this. After verifying my activity, the support agent read me my existing password one letter at a time. While this was alarming, I was amused she had to spell out a somewhat obscene phrase for me. This was maybe 20 years ago and I no longer use Sprint.

    • Illecors@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      MITM attack’s success rate just went to 100%

      No, it didn’t. It’s stupid and shouldn’t be done, but all ham nowadays is encrypted.

      I know that because I’ve been running my email server for some years now, technically breaking one of the RFCs for not allowing unencrypted connections. Zero email has been missed.

      • Aganim@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        While I agree that likely most SMTP traffic is sent encrypted these days, you simply cannot be sure. Just because you received something over an encrypted connection doesn’t mean that relays in between also used this. The webserver could have handed over the email unencrypted to an SMTP server for all you know. And even if an encrypted connection was used the mail might still have been copied to a log on the SMTP server. Email is unfortunately inherently unsafe.

  • ono@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think the OP of that post would have had a better reception if they had:

    • Responsibly disclosed what they found, rather than using it to stir up drama on social media.
    • Mentioned that it’s just a web forum account, not connected to game accounts or anything else of value.
    • Targeted the software vendor (https://www.ubbcentral.com/) instead of picking on one particular customer who used that software.
    • Refrained from spreading misconceptions and unfounded assumptions about how the technology works.
    • Responded to the reasonable follow-up questions, such as those that came when readers discovered that the problem was reported fixed three years ago.

    People in that thread responded with skepticism and criticism to an irresponsible, misdirected, misleading, alarmist mess of a post. That’s hardly surprising.

  • Aa!@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This was hashed out pretty thoroughly in that thread.

    The initial concern over the password being stored in plaintext was shown to be a mistaken assumption, and it was made clear that this kind of email doesn’t happen anymore, it’s an outdated problem.

    No need to keep the discussion going past that, is there? Much less spread it around?

    • adhdplantdev@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sending passwords via email Will compromise any passwords sent via email. Regardless if the password is stored anywhere in the process if the password is sent via email it is compromised and no longer safe to use. Email is not end and encrypted you have no idea who’s running the mail exchange servers that your email follows, it’s entirely possible for this company to store that password in a log dealing with their email servers. Password sent via email should be considered immediately compromised and any sites following a practice like this should not be trusted with standard passwords which you shouldn’t be using anyway.

      • Aa!@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Right, and everyone agreed that wasn’t the greatest practice. Two years ago.

        This thread from two days ago was bringing attention to an issue that was fixed two years ago, and calling it out as if it was a different problem than it was.

        It’s good to have discussions about security best practices, but this thread is pointless. This problem is simply not there anymore.

      • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Email isn’t end to end encrypted but, but it generally is encrypted. The people who will have it are the sender (who already have the password since they created it) and whoever runs the recipient’s mail server. Which is hopefully someone the recipient trusts.

        From the sounds of it, this was a password that the server randomly generated, so it’s never been used before, and you are forced to reset the password as soon as you use it, so it’ll never be used again and they do treat it as “immediately compromised”.

        Hardly state of the art security, but it also doesn’t really have any major problems… especially since this is for a forum.

      • FlumPHP@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sending passwords via email Will compromise any passwords sent via email.

        100%. But that is a different problem and a different attack vector than storing passwords in plain text for authentication. When reporting security issues, it’s important to be precise.

  • Kevin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    People weren’t really nitpicking.

    • it’s obviously bad to send an email with a plaintext password
    • the website owners had apparently already resolved the issue
    • it does not mean the passwords were stored in plaintext
    • the OP sounds like a skiddie in a bunch of comments and doesn’t seem to understand how most websites with auth work
    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      it does not mean the passwords were stored in plaintext

      This is debatable. Yes, there is a chance the email is being generated and sent on the fly, before the password is stored. But in situations like this there is a much larger chance it’s being stored in plain text.

        • MajorHavoc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Reversible hashed password storage isn’t meaningfully better than clear text.

          • The key to reverse the hash is typically (necessarily) stored in the same infrastructure as the password. Bad actors with access to one have access to the combination.
          • Even if an attacker fails to exfiltrate the key to the reversible hash, it’s typically only a matter of days at the most before they can reverse engineer it, and produce plain text copies of every password they obtained the hash of.

          A reversible hash provides a paper thin layer of protection against accidental disclosure. A one way hash is widely considered the bare minimum for password storage.

          Anyone claiming a password has been protected, and then being able to produce the original password, is justly subject to ridicule in security communities.

          • Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The one they were sending at registration was prior to hashing. It would not be reversible afterwards.

            • MajorHavoc@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              That’s technically less terrible, then.

              Good for them. /s

              Edited to add the /s for clarity, because the NIST recommended remediation in 2023 for emailing a password is “burn everything down and pretend the organization never existed”. /s

              Again, adding that /s since that’s not actually what NIST says to do, and I am, at best, paraphrasing.

        • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I wasn’t trying to claim what was happening here, simply that one (extremely) bad practice increases the chance of another.

      • JackbyDev@programming.devOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Also if they store a copy of that email they’re effectively storing the password in plaintext even if they e properly made a salty hash brown for the database.

        • MajorHavoc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Yep. And their own email system is probably also logging it somewhere. So are various servers along the way to it’s destination.

      • Kevin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        But in situations like this there is a much larger chance it’s being stored in plain text.

        I suppose, but OP said in the title that the passwords were being stored in plaintext, despite that not being the case.

        • MajorHavoc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Using “we use a reversible hash” to claim “we don’t store passwords in plain text” is the “corn syrup is not sugar” of the cybersecurity world.

          It’s technically correct, while also a bald faced lie.

          • Kevin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Not sure what you mean here, this is what the forum post said:

            After emailing (admittedly not current best practice), the passwords are hashed and only the hash is stored.

      • penguin@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why wouldn’t it be generated and sent immediately? If someone has the inclination to do this type of thing, they probably also want to do things synchronously and immediately.

        • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because one egregious decision normally begets another.

          Look at it this way, if you walk into a pizza joint and there are roaches wandering around on the walls, is it not more likely the food is also unsafe to eat?

          Yes, this could just be one horrible decision, but this decision shows you where the mind of the developer/team was when thinking through their security.

          • penguin@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You actually agree with me more than you disagree. If they have the mentality to send out clear text passwords, they probably don’t hage the natural talent to design an asynchronous system.

  • BlueBockser@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Everyone seems more interested in nitpicking

    Actually, not everyone in that thread is nitpicking. There’s one comment that’s just a helpful hint.

    But yes, nitpicking is fun. I’ll see myself out.

  • lowleveldata@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    OP of that thread was talking about how (they think) the password was stored in plain text instead of this “tree” you’re talking about. The discussion on that was not a nitpick.

    • TrudeauCastroson [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The forest is bad practice with passwords, since you get an email of your password after setting it.

      The tree is OP not knowing how to describe why it’s bad and saying the wrong reason why.

      • lowleveldata@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I mean, there were a lot of forests in that thread. Like how it was an old screenshot and they don’t do those emails anymore. Or you shouldn’t re-use passwords anyways. I don’t blame people for missing 1 or 2 forests.

  • chameleon@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    The number of people accepting email for some magic thing without in-between mechanisms is ridiculous. If it’s sent in an email you should 100% consider it to be stored in plaintext in multiple places. There is incredible amount of machinery between your mail() call and the end user reading that email, on both the sending and receiving end. For example, my spam filter (rspamd) will likely store a copy of it for a while, and that’s not unique to it.

    What’s in the database is not really relevant. Only the worst instance of storage counts.

  • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Everyone seems more interested in nitpicking the specifics of what OP is saying

    Yep. That’s how security works. You have to nitpick the specifics.

    The reality is nobody has invented a perfectly secure authentication system that is easy to use (for example, allows easy recovery when people forget their password which for any large service will be tens of millions of times per day).

    Attempts have been made - passkeys being the latest one - but they’re not even remotely easy to use as soon as you step slightly out of the most common path (such as using the web browser that is provided by the company you’re logged in with… try to use Chrome with an Apple passkey, or Safari with a Google passkey, and you’re going to stumble into usability issues).

    Passwords are not considered secure wether they’re sent in a plaintext email or not. They can be secure, if used properly, but 99% of users don’t follow best practices. As a result almost every web service in the world is insecure and it’s the nitpicky details that matter.

    Sending a secret to an email address is a standard step during registration for almost any service.

    • JackbyDev@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      When I say “nitpicking the specifics” I mean OP is saying things like the password should never be unencrypted in memory in the same comment as mentioning things like the password in plaintext in the email and folks are more interested in browbeating over the first thing rather than acknowledging the second as a problem. I see this behavior far too often in tech spaces online. People are often more concerned with being pedantic and technically correct than anything else.

      • Miaou@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The person you’re responding to is doing the exact same thing you are complaining about, and finished their comment with something obviously wrong. They are not arguing in good faith

  • NightLily@lemmy.basedcount.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    The only issue I can see is why are you sending the password to the person in the email at all just seems redundant… I think I may have run into a tree though.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Then you realize that some of the game-related 2fa apps out there are more secure than a lot of online banking credentials.

  • schmidtster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you’re following proper security procedures you wouldn’t be using the same password for anything else, so they are overly concerned about the wrong things while parading being top notch security wise while not doing it themselves.

    Yeah it’s an issue, but only an issue if you’ve set yourself up to be vulnerable.

    • krellor@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree. Unfortunately many folks who are attracted to security issues and topics don’t have a great holistic view of things. The idea of security is that something can go wrong and you are still ok, and that you apply context appropriate measures. Of course sending a password through email isn’t good, but it’s a gaming forum. A security conscious individual should have randomly generated passwords for everything and no reuse. Likewise, it wasn’t a bank or a security company, it was an old forum software for public discussions, so contextually this isn’t a top concern.

      The cherry on top is that it appears to have been an old screenshot and already addressed.

      • Kbin_space_program@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Its weird how there seems to be a group dedicated to creating and subsequently reporting on imagined faults within Larian. There have been a few articles and now that guy who used an out of date screenshot to make an unfounded claim.

        They aren’t perfect, and there are a fair number of things issues in BG3.

        Like that it has a number of the same issues as their previous game, Divinity Original Sin 2. Suggesting that they didn’t see those issues as issues, or didn’t see a need to change their process to correct them.

            • JackbyDev@programming.devOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Everyone seems more interested in nitpicking the specifics of what OP is saying and are ignoring that a forum sends you your password (not an automatically generated one) in an email on registration.

              • Kbin_space_program@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I see it as a non issue because Larian has a previous post up, in a timeframe window of acceptable lack of visible action, about them finding a solution to that problem.

                If nothing has been announced in a month or so, then it starts becoming a problem again.

    • JackbyDev@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s criticism directed at a service provider, not users. Service providers should assume users reuse passwords. Security is about protecting everyone.

      • schmidtster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Than direct it at the service provider? Oh wait it got fixed a while ago.

        Also where does their liability stop? Should they also just assume everyone is compromised? Where does the users onus come into play? I guess they shouldn’t send password resets than, since they should assume that their email is compromised already….

        Yeah that’s actually a terrible idea if they must assume that they must protect everyone. Sorry can’t reset your password your email must be compromised.

        • JackbyDev@programming.devOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is slippery slope bullshit and you know it. I’m not saying providers should have to magically prevent anything. I’m only saying they shouldn’t send you your password in an email. Crazy take, I know.

          Also, with regards to it already being fixed or not, when I made this thread I hadn’t seen anything about that in the other thread. I’m more just annoyed that people want to dunk on people with supposed gotchas while acting like sending a password in an email is okay somehow.

          • schmidtster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            No it’s not slippery slope in this case, it’s what you’re suggesting and why it’s utter bullshit. But yes of course that’s the obvious defense to take there.

            You’re not only saying that, you said that they need account for everything. Two totally different things. Can’t have X and not have Y.

            Sending a password is okay in quite a few scenarios, you’re talking to broad again her. Also, maybe make sure you know the story before jumping on as well…? You’re making the issues worse not better.

  • ck_@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    A sad truth and sadly not uncommon. Some people seem to get a kick out of showing of how much “smarter” they are than the next person, side tracking the whole conversation in the process. I really don’t get why someone would think that’s called for.

    • cwagner@lemmy.cwagner.me
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not “side tracking” when the thing being corrected is literally in the title of the post.