News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Bucketsquatting is (finally) dead by arielweisberg on Friday March 13, 2026 @12:52PM (#47366815)
This can be implemented without storing it. They could store a hash. No idea what they actually do.
Re:Bucketsquatting is (finally) dead by charcircuit on Friday March 13, 2026 @01:03PM (#47366954)
A hash of a public identifier like an email is personally identifiable data.
Re:Bucketsquatting is (finally) dead by jounker on Friday March 13, 2026 @01:55PM (#47367497)
Isn’t the entire point of a cryptographically secure hash that you can’t derive the original information?
Re:Bucketsquatting is (finally) dead by charcircuit on Friday March 13, 2026 @02:11PM (#47367675)
You can't derive the original better than guessing. With public identifiers you can just take a list of them and guess with those. If someone asks for your email they can hash it themselves and compare it against whatever databases.
Re:Bucketsquatting is (finally) dead by pfortuny on Friday March 13, 2026 @01:48PM (#47367431)
You can always encrypt with a public key instead of hashing.
Re:Bucketsquatting is (finally) dead by pbhjpbhj on Saturday March 14, 2026 @07:04AM (#47375420)
You mean 'as well as', right?
Re:Bucketsquatting is (finally) dead by pfortuny on Saturday March 14, 2026 @07:29AM (#47375571)
No, I mean encrypting (using a random padding like OAEP-RSA) gives an undecipherable item.