305
Larion Studios forum stores your passwords in unhashed plaintext. Don't use a password there that you've used anywhere else.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2023
305 points (75.0% liked)
Games
32557 readers
1708 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
That doesn't really mean that they store it in plain text. They sent it to you after you finished creating your account, and it's likely that the password was just in plain text during the registration. The question still remains whether they store their outgoing emails (in which case yes, your password would still be stored in plain text on their end, not in the database though).
Your guess is confirmed here.
...and later...
Which raises the question of how old OP's screen shot is.
Also, no, the password would not necessarily still be stored in plain text on their end. The cleartext password used in that email might be only in memory, and discarded after sending the message. Depends on how the UBB forum software implemented it and how Larian's mail servers are set up.
EDIT: I just verified that this behavior has resurfaced since it was originally fixed. OP would do well to responsibly report it, rather than stirring up drama over a web forum account.
It is still a bad idea to send the password in plaintext via email. You never know when Bard will peek a look and then share your password along users as a demo account to try that forum.
There's a lot of reasons why emailing passwords is not the best practice... But AI bots stealing your password to give people free demos is a wild paranoid fever dream.
EDIT: Apparently, I replied to a joke.
It is meant to be as a joke, of course the AI is not that dumb enough to give it away as free demo. Why am I being downvoted? Why don't people understand jokes these days? Do I always have to include /s when making a sarcastic joke even though it is so obvious?
I've seen people argue stupider things earnestly.
Nobody suggested otherwise.
You should always change your password from the system generated one to prevent that from happening. The app that you signed up for should enforce that by making you change your password when you log in.
It's not a system generated one they sent, it was user generated.
¿Porque no los dos?
Took them 23 years to fix it last time, seems public awareness would be important in the interim, no?
I actually think this is the case. I could be completely wrong but I swear I saw the same question like 6 years ago in another forum software that looks exactly like this one lol. And people compalined about it storing plain text, but the response when asking the forum people was that it was only during that password creation, it's not actually stored.
I don't know if it's crazy for me to think it's the same forum from that many years ago, still doing the same thing and getting the same question.
Yes, still not worth risking using a duplicate password though.
Honestly, why risk duplicate passwords even then? I have one strong password that I use for accessing my password manager, and let the password manager generate unique random passwords. Even if I had an easier password that I duplicated with some small changes, I'd still use a password manager to autofill it anyway. I use bitwarden personally, you can also self host it with vaultwarden but it seemed like more trouble than it was worth imo
This is a friendly reminder to everyone that password managers are not risk free either. LastPass was hacked last year, NortonLifeLock earlier this year.
Personally the risk of bitwarden is outweighed by its convenience (compared to self hosted/local only solutions) in my opinion, but I know that'll change real quick if bitwarden ever has a breach. If it does I'm jumping ship to a self hosted or local only solution, but I'm hoping that doesn't have to happen
Bitwarden is end to end encrypted. If the host gets hacked your passwords are still as safe as your master password is. Self hosting wouldn’t really be a huge help there. Possibly even detrimental depending on your level of competence at securing a public facing web host.
They're as safe as your master password is...and as the encryption is. LastPass famously got hacked recently, and in the aftermath of that many users noticed that their vault was encrypted using very small numbers of rounds of PBKDF2. The recommended number of rounds had increased, but LastPass left the number actually used too low for some users, rather than automatically increasing it. Users of Bitwarden and any other password vault should ensure that their vault is using the strongest encryption available.
Well, self-hosting makes you a smaller target. The most determined attackers are likely going to go after the biggest target, which is going to be a centralised service with thousands of users' vaults. If you host it yourself they probably won't even know it exists, so unless there's reason for someone to be specifically targeting you (e.g. you're a public figure), or you get hacked by some broad untargeted attack, you might be better off self-hosted from a purely security standpoint.
(That said, I still use centrally-hosted Bitwarden. The convenience is worth it to me.)
You’re underestimating the attack surface of a self hosted set up. You don’t need to be specifically targeted if, for instance, someone hacks the Bitwarden docker image you’re using, or slips a malicious link into a tutorial you’re reading. It’s not a set it and forget it solution either, you’re responsible for updating it, and the host OS. Like I said, depending on your competency, it’s not inherently more secure.
I heard people’s LastPass accounts were getting compromised after that theft, but I also don’t know how strong their master passwords were.
Yeah at this point it's considered likely that LastPass vaults are being cracked, based on LP being the common link between various other accounts that are being breeched.
A small number of rounds of encryption being the default for users with old enough accounts is believed to be a significant part of the issue. It means even if their password was a good one, the vault can be brute forced comparatively quickly.
If their password was actually good (18+ random characters) it's not feasible with current day technology to brute force, no matter how few PBKDF2 iterations were used.
Obviously it's still a big issue because in many cases people don't use strong enough passwords (and apparently LastPass stored some of the information in plaintext) but a strong password is still good protection provided the encryption algorithm doesn't have any known exploitable weaknesses.
Centralized, third party password managers, yes. Local-only managers like KeepassXC though, no concerns over some company getting hacked or cheeky
This is why I don't use a common centralized password manager, just like I don't use any of the most popular remote desktop solutions like TeamViewer for unattended access.
I run a consumer copy of Pleasant Password Manager out of AWS and use NoMachine for unattended access to any machines where I need it.
Security through obscurity is tried and true. Put as little of your security attack surface in the hands of others as is reasonable.
Applies to every site ever
Came here to say this
Well you're late
I'm good thanks
We all know that they store it in plain text.