Skip to content

16 Billion Apple, Facebook, Google And Other Passwords Leaked — Act Now

Technology
7 6 0
  • This post did not contain any content.
  • This post did not contain any content.

    What is this article? Besides terrible, I mean. This article is terrible.

    First of all, this isn't a new leak. It's not even a combination of old leaks. It's just somebody noticing that a bunch of leaks existed and did an Excel Sum operation on the passwords on them.

    According to Vilius Petkauskas at Cybernews, whose researchers have been investigating the leakage since the start of the year, “30 exposed datasets containing from tens of millions to over 3.5 billion records each,” have been discovered. In total, Petkauskas has confirmed, the number of compromised records has now hit 16 billion. Let that sink in for a bit.

    And to add insult to injury, the article has this gem:

    Is This The GOAT When It Comes To Passwords Leaking?

    Password compromise is no joke.

    Certainly not with writing like this.

  • What is this article? Besides terrible, I mean. This article is terrible.

    First of all, this isn't a new leak. It's not even a combination of old leaks. It's just somebody noticing that a bunch of leaks existed and did an Excel Sum operation on the passwords on them.

    According to Vilius Petkauskas at Cybernews, whose researchers have been investigating the leakage since the start of the year, “30 exposed datasets containing from tens of millions to over 3.5 billion records each,” have been discovered. In total, Petkauskas has confirmed, the number of compromised records has now hit 16 billion. Let that sink in for a bit.

    And to add insult to injury, the article has this gem:

    Is This The GOAT When It Comes To Passwords Leaking?

    Password compromise is no joke.

    Certainly not with writing like this.

    Clickbait from Forbes, with not a single mention of 2FA/Two Factor Auth?

    Link Preview Image

    Colour me not surprised.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    As far as I know, the passwords aren't stored in the databases, it's the hash produced by a one-way function that is stored in the database. Grabbing these is useless.

  • As far as I know, the passwords aren't stored in the databases, it's the hash produced by a one-way function that is stored in the database. Grabbing these is useless.

    Hashes can be brute forced, it's just normally too expensive to do so for any reasonably complex password. If you're using "password123" as your password even a hashed password is easily cracked (salting and peppering can help make this more difficult, although still not impossible).

  • What is this article? Besides terrible, I mean. This article is terrible.

    First of all, this isn't a new leak. It's not even a combination of old leaks. It's just somebody noticing that a bunch of leaks existed and did an Excel Sum operation on the passwords on them.

    According to Vilius Petkauskas at Cybernews, whose researchers have been investigating the leakage since the start of the year, “30 exposed datasets containing from tens of millions to over 3.5 billion records each,” have been discovered. In total, Petkauskas has confirmed, the number of compromised records has now hit 16 billion. Let that sink in for a bit.

    And to add insult to injury, the article has this gem:

    Is This The GOAT When It Comes To Passwords Leaking?

    Password compromise is no joke.

    Certainly not with writing like this.

    And spelling mistakes in an article from Forbes? Total garbage.

  • Hashes can be brute forced, it's just normally too expensive to do so for any reasonably complex password. If you're using "password123" as your password even a hashed password is easily cracked (salting and peppering can help make this more difficult, although still not impossible).

    I'm perfectly aware anything can be brute forced and that's why it doesn't worth to mention. Now, the amount of resources required to brute force a hashed password has nothing to do with the complexity of the password. No matter what the password is, the hash will have a fixed length and appear as a random sequence of bytes. Otherwise you are not doing it properly.

    The complexity of the password has something to do with guessing the password from dictionary or known most common passwords.

  • 324 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    P
    Jimmy Carter gave up his tiny peanut farm. Yet people nowadays are just incapable of understanding the concept of conflict of interest?
  • 34 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    L
    $200 million doesn't cover the first billion in losses OpenAI inflicts upon itself, but I'm not a fan of this bailout regardless.
  • 137 Stimmen
    41 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    R
    And I think you swallowed one too many Apple ads.
  • 108 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    K
    The title at least dont say anything new AFAIK. Because you could already download from external sources but those apps still needed to be signed by apple. But maybe they changed?
  • 157 Stimmen
    30 Beiträge
    15 Aufrufe
    D
    These are the 700 Actually Indians
  • 5 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 168 Stimmen
    11 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    A
    Law enforcement officer
  • CrowdStrike Announces Layoffs Affecting 500 Employees

    Technology technology
    8
    1
    243 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    S
    This is where the magic of near meaningless corpo-babble comes in. The layoffs are part of a plan to aspirationally acheive the goal of $10b revenue by EoY 2025. What they are actually doing is a significant restructuring of the company, refocusing by outside hiring some amount of new people to lead or be a part of departments or positions that haven't existed before, or are being refocused to other priorities... ... But this process also involves laying off 500 of the 'least productive' or 'least mission critical' employees. So, technically, they can, and are, arguing that their new organizational paradigm will be so succesful that it actually will result in increased revenue, not just lower expenses. Generally corpos call this something like 'right-sizing' or 'refocusing' or something like that. ... But of course... anyone with any actual experience with working at a place that does this... will tell you roughly this is what happens: Turns out all those 'grunts' you let go of, well they actually do a lot more work in a bunch of weird, esoteric, bandaid solutions to keep everything going, than upper management was aware of... because middle management doesn't acknowledge or often even understand that that work was being done, because they are generally self-aggrandizing narcissist petty tyrants who spend more time in meetings fluffing themselves up than actually doing any useful management. Then, also, you are now bringing on new, outside people who look great on paper, to lead new or modified apartments... but they of course also do not have any institutional knowledge, as they are new. So now, you have a whole bunch of undocumented work that was being done, processes which were being followed... which is no longer being done, which is not documented.... and the new guys, even if they have the best intentions, now have to spend a quarter or two or three figuring out just exactly how much pre-existing middle management has been bullshitting about, figuring out just how much things do not actually function as they ssid it did... So now your efficiency improving restructuring is actually a chaotic mess. ... Now, this 'right sizing' is not always apocalyptically extremely bad, but it is also essentially never totally free from hiccups... and it increases stress, workload, and tensions between basically everyone at the company, to some extent. Here's Forbes explanation of this phenomenon, if you prefer an explanation of right sizing in corpospeak: https://www.forbes.com/advisor/business/rightsizing/