'Impossible-to-Hack' Security Turns Out to Be No Security at All
92 comments
·February 24, 2025iandanforth
The tone of the article is unprofessional to say the least. You could remove the argumentative tone, vitriol, and insults and have a more impactful article that reflected well on the author while appropriately warning people against this company. Please, don't choose team troll.
catapart
Personally, I find the tone of the article appropriate for the response received. The first email clearly set the tone as cordial and friendly while still being urgent. The response was in a clearly adversarial tone. So the prompter adjusted their tone accordingly.
It wasn't necessary to match tones with the person whom wanted to be uncharitable, but it definitely feels more human to me, which is who the writing is for: humans. I would have been fine with an info dump, but I enjoy turnabout as much as any other fan of fair play.
dghlsakjg
The author is not acting in a professional role here.
He, in his own time, discovered a pretty serious exposure of information and politely informed them. They decided to not be polite in return. He responded in the same tone as them.
There was never any professional obligation, nor any obligation for the author to inform them of their breach at all, nor was there any obligation to give them time to notify clients before publication. Those are all courtesies.
This man didn't choose team troll, he responded to team troll in kind.
vorpalhex
To double down here, the author did the correct thing by using their snarkiness.
If someone who in theory is a professional (the company that left all of this in the open) responds in an unprofessional way from the start - you are done using professional tone. That tool isn't producing results. Stop using that tool.
The goal is not to model perfect manners - it is to bring attention to a breach so it can be remedied. The author understands this and has acted so to achieve this result.
ryandrake
I was also ready to chalk this up to "Yet another security researcher needs to learn how to play well with others..." but the moronic and indigent response from "Sean" makes it clear who's wrong here.
Imagine an alternate universe where "Sean" wasn't so aggressively stupid, and instead replied: "Thanks, JayeLTee, we took the database down while we do an audit. We don't think there were any access, and we would rather you not go public about the findings, but it will take us time to check. Please hold off on your publication until [DATE] and we will be in touch."
There. That didn't take much effort! But, no, "Sean" chose belligerence and threats rather than professionalism. I don't know what is wrong with people who just seem to default to "bad attitude" in their communications.
JayeLTee
The alternative universe can be seen on this post: https://jltee.substack.com/p/lcptrackercom-lcptracker-inc-se...
The company did reach out and said something similar, I held my publication for months months waiting for a reply which they said they would send and ended up finding out their were filing breach notifications to multiple states and never said anything back to me.
JayeLTee
Not a journalist or a reporter, posts aren't meant to be professional. The only reason I even write any of my posts is because companies DO NOT disclose incidents at all, so I have to do it for them.
mind-blight
I thoroughly enjoyed the post and thought your tone was appropriate, entertaining, and kind of kethartic. You didn't call them names, engage in ad hominem, or do anything click-batey. You were understandably irritated at how they talked to you and how they were clearly trying to hide a massive exposure from their users. And then you shredded them with data.
A+ - And thanks for trying to keep folks like this honest!
dingnuts
sure you're a journalist, but the best kind! Gonzo![0]
I found the tone highly entertaining; don't let the haters wear you down
woodrowbarlow
why is the author obligated to use a professional tone?
grayhatter
The author is more professional than the sean was, and conveys the correct amount of disgust we should all hold for this company and it's leadership.
The point of the essay was to be disrespectful of the CEO. Slightly less disrespectful than the CEO was, so IMO he still holds onto the high ground of ethics.
Please do choose team troll. The correct response to someone being a shitter, is not always to kill them with kindness. A lot of the time it is, but this time, I'm clearly on the authors side. He tried twice to be kind, was ignored and then insulted. When really he was owed a thank you, not to be disrespected.
null
Spunkie
Your comment is unprofessional, the CEO in question deserves a lot more vitriol frankly.
delichon
To be fair, security through denial, lies and intimidation is the industry standard.
Leaving the passwords in clear text is double plus ungood. But my employer recently bought another outfit that does just that, and fixing it is not a near term option. So I'm stuck managing that and three of my fingers are pointing back to me.
soco
Technically speaking if there's nothing to break, it is unbreakable right? Also if you change the law about some crime, you don't have a crime anymore...
dieselgate
Dang this is real life. “We didn’t used to do it but..”
cratermoon
Some powerful people subscribe to the idea that "if I (or the law) says don't touch it, it's secure". This attitude was on full display a little over three years ago in Missouri. https://missouriindependent.com/2021/10/14/missouri-governor...
scoot
> my employer recently bought another outfit that does that does just that [leaves passwords in cleartext], and fixing it is not a near term option
Could you expand on why not? I can't think of a good reason why this isn't a relatively quick fix. What's the blocker?
delichon
It requires programming in a language specific to one little known db product, in an extremely brittle and spaghettified code base . There's exactly one person in the company who kinda knows how to do it, and they're unavailable for the foreseeable future on higher priorities. We don't have the money to throw at new hires or huge porting projects.
Imagine software that has been in production since the 80's, was written by a very inexperienced dev and has since been continually "organically" upgraded to handle any new promise that a nontechnical product manager feels is necessary to solve the immediate problem of an angry customer. It's a Janga tower with a reset button.
scoot
> they're unavailable for the foreseeable future on higher priorities
Need I respond to that?
null
ben_w
(not op, just hypothesising)
> I can't think of a good reason why this isn't a quick fix.
What if there's some IoT product with no update mechanism and the access password to function is stored on all of them in plain text?
scoot
Possibly, but that's a very different scenario to a database of cleartext passwords (which is what I assumed was meant), as each device would have to be identified and compromised to access a password to a device which at that point is already compromised...
tptacek
I'm confused about the chronology here:
1. He discovers an unprotected database.
2. He mails the CEO of the company.
3. The database is fixed.
4. He mails the CEO again to say he's publishing.
5. The CEO replies and says there was no security breach.
6. He goes spelunking in the database tables to write a rebuttal?
How does step 6 happen? What has this person exfiltrated from the database, in advance of losing access to it in step 3?
grayhatter
Step 6 happened because the CEO in his hubris, decided it would be in his best interests to threaten someone instead of being greatful.
Additionally, had the CEO responded appropriately and followed the standard methodology of all reasonable bug bounty programs, it would have included a request for the researcher to verify the fix and that there are no additional related bugs or defects with the current patch.
You noticed that the email implies the security has been perfected. Did you also note that it would be unethical for a professional to blindly convey that false belief.
tptacek
I'm wondering how it's possible that step 6 happened, not what the motivations are. It's written in multiple places as if database queries were issued after the database was taken down.
42lux
If they took an hour for the "fix" I guess it wasn't one.
grayhatter
Did you not consider the CEO would just lie about fixing something?
TremendousJudge
I think the data he discloses in the post is the one that he got before getting in contact with the company. He does this in order to prove that the database was accesible to anyone on the internet, instead of the "no breach at all" claimed on the response email.
chias
TBH it sounds like he exfil'ed / downloaded the database before reporting.
polynomial
Isn't this a jurisdictional crime that a well connected CEO could get him in a lot of trouble for?
DangitBobby
I can see how the CEO would consider the initial email to be a scam, sales pitch, or blackmail (still not entirely sure it doesn't qualify as the last two). I'm sure there have been plenty of emails that qualify as such disclaiming themselves so. Of course, I wouldn't have responded how he did; he needed to tread carefully here when he followed up to learn there was an actual breach, but I totally get why he responded that way. Maybe in the future when making initial contact, instead of telling them only that you aren't scamming them or selling something, tell them what you DO want, or at least tell them you will follow up, just let them know how this goes. That would probably make the medicine go down a bit easier when you follow up later.
Ultimately, when you did air out their laundry after they responded poorly, it did kind of feel like you were blackmailing them.
JayeLTee
I told him everything he needed to know to fix the exposure on my initial contact on the exact same email I tell him I'm not asking for anything. I even told him some information about the exposed tables.
Backed by the fact that 1 hour after my email, the exposure was closed and the company never replied back to me, it was only after I followed up they emailed all those claims.
Again, I never asked for anything, I even offered to delay my publication so they could notify people if that was their intent, where is the blackmail here?
DangitBobby
Like I said in another comment, I _still_ don't know what you want from them. If you don't want money and it's not a scam, why are you emailing them? That's what I'm saying, the email feels sketchy, I would NOT be happy to receive such an email. And though perhaps legal (though actually accessing the exposed data was perhaps not legal), publicly humiliating them after the fact when they behave in a way you don't like (sketchy behavior) indicates to me you had sketchy intentions to begin with.
ziddoap
>If you don't want money and it's not a scam, why are you emailing them?
It may be shocking to you, but some security researchers notify companies when they are exposing data of their customers. That's it! Simple.
When I notice that thousands of people's personal information is available, I also will email the company and let them know that they are exposing the information of their customers. I don't want money in return. My hobby is security, my payment is knowing that I helped thousands of people out.
>I would NOT be happy to receive such an email.
You would rather just continue to expose your customer's information? Interesting... I don't think you have the ethical high ground here, if that is your position.
42lux
I hope you are not in a client-facing role, as you appear to lack the ability to understand another's perspective. Security researchers rely on publications and recognition from security platforms to build their CVs. That's what he wanted. Think about it that way if everyone was a n idiot like the CEO of this ordeal we would have way less white hats.
null
ForHackernews
As I read it, he wants them to secure their systems and fulfill their legal and ethical obligations to their customers and regulators by notifying them of the breach.
I'm not sure what you find ambiguous or confusing.
margalabargala
That's...not what blackmail is.
Blackmail is when someone says "do $thing or else". That didn't happen here, implicitly or explicitly.
If you're saying the implicit blackmail was "don't be an asshole, or else I'll be unkind when I talk about you later to others", then all of us are always blackmailing one another with every conversation.
DangitBobby
Yes, "it would be a shame if something were to happen" is also not extortion, because you aren't actually saying you will visit misery upon them, only implying it. The mistake you are making is assuming the researcher wants literally nothing, or that the CEO can know they want literally nothing. I still have no idea what they actually wanted, and whether there was going to be some sort of value extraction.
margalabargala
I see you read and understood the researcher's emails as well as the CEO did, then...I'm not assuming anything, I'm repeating what was said.
Are you suggesting that lacking understanding of something someone says, one's first reaction should be an asshole to that person, just in case they are trying to sell something?
null
celticninja
Oh dear, that really is a poor response by the CEO. Can't wait to see the grovelling apology he comes up with when NZ media/regulator comes asking questions
badmintonbaseba
It looks like the CEO is both clueless and his reports are also probably misleading him. Whoever looked into the security problem probably saw the extent of it. This possibly got downplayed when reported back to the CEO. However rude, the CEO had little reason to lie about the extent of the problem towards the security researcher.
shitter
I imagine the conversation between the CEO and his reports included something about "it's no biggie, the passwords were hashed using bcrypt, that's like irreversible encryption" without contextualizing that and mentioning that plaintext auth tokens were also exposed.
sevg
Unfortunately, there are people out there (with a seemingly large overlap with CEOs) that have incredibly fragile egos, and any perceived criticism (such as pointing out a dreadful security failure) can result in lies, excessive reactions, defensiveness, denial, insults, scapegoating or even retaliation. Or all of the above.
In situations like this, it feels to me like the reaction is “how dare you think that I would need your help?!”
soulofmischief
Name and shame. Great job, great write up.
readthenotes1
That's almost too good to be true - - that the CEO thought that Proton was the author's company
JohnFen
Once again, one of my rules of thumb holds true: if someone is claiming that their security is "impossible to hack", they're either massively incompetent or they're trying to sell you some BS.
dtgm92
Not very polite or understanding.
Wants to be helpful but comes across as aggressive, names and shames them, insults and ridicules them... come on, you can do better.
JayeLTee
OP here, the one who found the exposed data.
Not sure if you read my 2 emails to the company but I would say I was polite to them and was met with accusations of harassment and straight up lies.
Don't expect me to pat you in the back if you come at me with such claims when I simply alerted you of a security issue.
DangitBobby
I don't think you get to call yourself polite or well-meaning when you pan them and air their shit out publicly after they respond in a way you don't like. Maybe you were superficially polite, but you do not come across as an angel. I _still_ don't know exactly what your goals are, if you're looking for acknowledgement, payment, or just trying to make the Internet a safer place for users.
JayeLTee
I think the around 50 public disclosures I did in the last year where I asked 0 times for anything kinda show I'm not looking for any payments.
There is a huge issue regarding publicly exposed data that no one seems to want to acknowledge or talk about, what you see online? It's 100 times worse.
I'm someone who is trying to raise awareness through my finds, nothing else.
Also I was initially polite to the company, not once but twice, as I am to anyone who I reach out, why wouldn't I be? I want them to fix the issues, not ignore me.
Don't expect the politeness to be infinite though, specially when you start accusing me of harassment and lying about the severity of the exposure that affects thousands of people, the ones I DO care about, not the companies.
prododev
Sure you do. The poster was polite, got an extremely rude response, and has no obligation to be polite afterwards.
Airing their shit out is a disclosure of a vulnerability, and it's important to do. Typically you reach out to say, "how would you prefer I do this?" And work through a common understanding. The company flipped the bird, so it got aired very publicly.
DangitBobby
Agree. "You're not wrong, Walter, you're just an asshole!" Best case scenario, CEO just got an annoying distraction that was a credible enough threat they had to waste time investigating. Worst case they had a breach and someone is extorting or hacking them. Some grace on the part of the researcher is warranted IMO, despite the amateur handling by the CEO. No one looks good here.
grayhatter
The OP/researcher looks fine. They tried twice to help someone who would eventually prove they didn't deserve they help. They then, after being disrespected, still upheld all the ethical requirements from a security researcher, redacting sensitive information. The CEO looks like a twat waffle, but the researcher is clean, and just looks like someone intolerant of overt disrespect. Being willing to stand up to bullies is admirable, not disheartening.
From https://databreaches.net/2025/02/24/no-need-to-hack-when-its...
DataBreaches also invited Sean Banayan to provide a statement for publication. He replied promptly to this site’s email: "We will further investigate this matter internally and do not wish to entertain this matter with your website."
He really missed all the lessons in both manners, common sense and media training.