News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by mistyq on Tuesday April 28, 2020 @06:05AM (#23005434)
How was it possible to discover it, though?
Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by samthecoy on Tuesday April 28, 2020 @09:56AM (#23006975)
From the twitter comments: https://twitter.com/bicycult/status/1255122953798328320

They were still logged in and refreshed the page; they found out by going to their user settings.

Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by jasonbarone on Tuesday April 28, 2020 @05:41PM (#23012452)
I've seen this same method used on multiples apps I've requested an account deletion on. It's super frustrating. Most companies either don't respond back, say they deleted it when they merely disabled it, or they updated the account name to something else.
Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by three_seagrass on Tuesday April 28, 2020 @06:50PM (#23013065)
Disabling is understandable, because as a company you need a record of transactions or interactions such as TOS agreements for legal purposes. This requires keeping the records.

Changing object name data though is a terrible practice to implement this.

Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by malinens on Wednesday April 29, 2020 @12:00AM (#23015197)
actually GDPR forces You to have option to delete all data and not just d8sable user
Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by ptman on Wednesday April 29, 2020 @12:18AM (#23015304)
It's a bit more complicated than that. You have a period of time to delete the data. And you can keep enough info to know what data you've deleted, so that if you restore from backups you are able to re-delete without having to go through your backups and delete everything. Probably more that I'm forgetting.
Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by three_seagrass on Wednesday April 29, 2020 @02:24AM (#23016040)
You can keep contact info even after a GDPR deletion request, so long as you're not using it for business purposes.

Otherwise imagine how easy it would be to violate the deletion request if you're running a business and can't remember the names of the people you had deletion requests for. Their data could come up again through normal channels and you'd treat them no differently than another sales contact, thus violating GDPR.

Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by Asuchug4 on Wednesday April 29, 2020 @12:34AM (#23015403)
Depends on type of data and other laws. If you are a paying customer you can assume your data will be stay in database, until it is no longer required for audits. GDPR allows for anything that is 'absolutely totally required for providing service'.
Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by speleding on Wednesday April 29, 2020 @05:14AM (#23017082)
In most countries you are required to keep payment records for tax purposes for 5 years or more. As this is a business necessity this trumps the GDPR. And since most business involves some kind of payment it's likely most businesses will not actually fully delete the information they have on file for you.
Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by KeepFlying on Tuesday April 28, 2020 @04:34PM (#23011617)
I noticed a similar thing being done for Bird scooters a while back. I forget the suffix but they did the same and I noticed because I was still authed on my phone after requesting deletion. My token has expired since then though so for all I know they have fully deleted the account since.
Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by ashtonkem on Tuesday April 28, 2020 @05:24PM (#23012265)
Having known people who worked at Bird, I doubt it. They had a real culture of “hack it up and then move on”, going back and fixing stuff like that isn’t in their culture.
Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by berkes on Wednesday April 29, 2020 @02:19AM (#23016010)
I once received an automated email to '[email protected]'. Where example.com is my domain. I employ catchall, so that I can generate a new mail for each service. I contacted them and they apologised. The CTO personally explained that this was legacy they lost track of and thanked me for pointing out.

You catch a lot, with catchall: dataleaks, hacks, sneaky data sales etc. When suddenly you recieve, say, marketing mail for shirts on '[email protected]' something fishy is going down.

Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by HenryBemis on Wednesday April 29, 2020 @03:01AM (#23016246)
I have been doing the same since 2001, the amount of crap the net catches is unfathomable. Apparently there is a company somewhere on this planet with the same name as my last name "bemis.com" while my domain is "bemis.net" and I sometimes get invoices, CVs, PowerPoint presentations, emails from their external auditors.. I am waiting for the day they will ask me to buy my domain (which I use long before their company was created)(oh and it is my last name.. so good luck with that).

Having done enough security audits, "this was legacy" is a BS excuse. I will go ahead and assume that NYT have an audit department. And that audit dept runs throug the full audit universe every 4-5 years. Someone would have captured that a long time ago (1st, 2nd, 3rd lines)(external auditors)(any sales pitch: "we have 438264728 subscribers")

I call BS. They got busted and now they most likely change this from 1000 to 2000 and call it a day..

Ps: bemis is not my real last name.. but I am using a super cool name over here!!

Re:Instead of deleting account, NYT appends ‘1000’ to userna... by gramakri on Tuesday April 28, 2020 @05:45PM (#23012503)
Catch all addresses? If you self-host email (we do), you are able to catch email with typos etc with a catch all address