Re:Clubhouse data leak: 1.3M user records leaked online for ...
by bitexploder on Sunday April 11, 2021 @02:59PM
(#26772556)
Am aware. Still don’t think it’s worth the hassle for most situations. Can leak information, but context is really important. I have rarely seen it be an issue over many years of app assessments. Just something to keep in the threat model for when it’s relevant.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Clubhouse data leak: 1.3M user records leaked online for ...
by yardstick on Sunday April 11, 2021 @11:30PM
(#26775830)
There was one wireless ISP many years ago in a city I lived in that had a signal/reception page to see your signal to their closet tower. The URL included the customer number to identify your location. I quickly discovered it had no authorisation checks. You could easily find the exact addresses of all of their customers. Inactive/old customers returned no data.
Re:Clubhouse data leak: 1.3M user records leaked online for ...
by shalmanese on Sunday April 11, 2021 @07:55PM
(#26774710)
What hassle is it? Where in your codebase do you assume sequentiality? It should be a one line change in your db configs to generate GUIDs instead of ids. You have to do it eventually anyway as sequentiality can't be assumed once you shard.
Re:Clubhouse data leak: 1.3M user records leaked online for ...
by bitexploder on Sunday April 11, 2021 @08:15PM
(#26774821)
Depends on the needs I suppose. I don’t like starting off with GUIDs until it’s proven they are needed, because, as you say, it’s a simple change. Sharing does complicate the picture, but how many apps really need sharding.
Re:Clubhouse data leak: 1.3M user records leaked online for ...
by sangnoir on Monday April 12, 2021 @07:41PM
(#26786510)
> I don’t like starting off with GUIDs until it’s proven they are needed
For security incidents, "when they are needed" will be too late to do anything. If it's all the same to you, I'd advise that you default to GUIDs.