108
From a PSA stand point, 23andMe makes a really good point here.
From a Legal / Responsible Data Custodian perspective, it's the same collective responsibility bullshit that the oil industry likes to shit out about climate change.
this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2024
108 points (94.3% liked)
Cybersecurity
5753 readers
388 users here now
c/cybersecurity is a community centered on the cybersecurity and information security profession. You can come here to discuss news, post something interesting, or just chat with others.
THE RULES
Instance Rules
- Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
- No Ads / Spamming.
- No pornography.
Community Rules
- Idk, keep it semi-professional?
- Nothing illegal. We're all ethical here.
- Rules will be added/redefined as necessary.
If you ask someone to hack your "friends" socials you're just going to get banned so don't do that.
Learn about hacking
Other security-related communities [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
Notable mention to [email protected]
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
While it's not the point 23andMe wants to make here, it is an absolutely horrible idea to allow a company to access, catalog and sell your DNA information. Shame they didn't touch on that point.
23andMe can have all of the security practices they want, but they can't stop users from reusing passwords from other sites.
Uhh yeah you can..
Mandatory 2FA with phone and password retry count. If it's targeted using breach data of email/passwords then the 2FA should still stop the majority...
Shouldn’t service providers be hashing the plaintext passwords that show up in dark web leaks to see if matching users reused those passwords?
Wouldn’t really be of any use if they’re doing things right and salt their hashes
They typically do, but that doesn't stop hackers from posting the plaintext.
The real solution is to never store plaintext and to use MFA.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
“Rather than acknowledge its role in this data security disaster, 23andMe has apparently decided to leave its customers out to dry while downplaying the seriousness of these events,” Hassan Zavareei, one of the lawyers representing the victims who received the letter from 23andMe, told TechCrunch in an email.
In December, 23andMe admitted that hackers had stolen the genetic and ancestry data of 6.9 million users, nearly half of all its customers.
The hackers broke into this first set of victims by brute-forcing accounts with passwords that were known to be associated with the targeted customers, a technique known as credential stuffing.
“The breach impacted millions of consumers whose data was exposed through the DNA Relatives feature on 23andMe’s platform, not because they used recycled passwords.
23andMe’s attempt to shirk responsibility by blaming its customers does nothing for these millions of consumers whose data was compromised through no fault of their own whatsoever,” said Zavareei.
Lawyers with experience representing data breach victims told TechCrunch that the changes were “cynical,” “self-serving,” and “a desperate attempt” to protect itself and deter customers from going after the company.
The original article contains 721 words, the summary contains 184 words. Saved 74%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Yeah, users have some of the blame, but 23andme shares responsibility by not having basic detection of bad actors. Some things that come to mind are rate limits, alarms on strange user login behavior, watching for mass logins from an unexpected region, excessive bad password attempts across a large number of users.