Technology

60110 readers

3526 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

381

Tech Company Leaks 2FA Codes/Password Reset Links for Major Platforms (techcrunch.com)

submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/technology

75 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A security breach exposed two-factor authentication (2FA) codes/password reset links for millions of users on platforms like Facebook, Google, and TikTok.

Key Points:

YX International, an SMS routing company, left an internal database exposed online without a password.
The database contained one-time 2FA codes and password reset links for various tech giants.
YX International secured the database and claims to have "sealed the vulnerability."
The company wouldn't confirm how long the database was exposed or if anyone else accessed it.
Representatives from Meta, Google, and TikTok haven't commented yet.

Concerns:

This leak highlights the vulnerabilities of SMS-based 2FA compared to app-based methods.
The lack of information regarding the leak's duration and potential access by others raises concerns.

Gemini Recommendations:

Consider switching to app-based 2FA for increased security.
Be cautious of suspicious communications and avoid clicking unknown links.
Stay informed about potential security breaches affecting your online accounts.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Rednax 16 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Google is not a mobile phone network provider. SMS routing is not really their cup of tea. It is an industry with lots of established players, lota of local issues, and little to gain for Google. If it where up to Google, everyone would be using their app instead of SMS.

[+] TheBat -20 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I didn't ask why they've outsourced SMS transmission. I'm aware that trying to do it yourself means going through lot of bureaucratic and regulatory stuff.

I asked why they're outsourcing security.

[–] neatchee 16 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Not only are you rude, but you are the one who isn't understanding.

Nobody is "outsourcing security". You have failed to comprehend the situation and instead of accepting your own ignorance you've turned around and been an ass to the person who tried to answer your question

Do better

[+] TheBat -9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Does 2FA setup need SMS? Google could easily ignore SMS and still provide security via 2FA/MFA, either by secondary email or phone call.

Also, these YX guys had their supposedly private database exposed to the internet. What kind of due diligence was done by Google before thay company was chosen as a vendor?

[–] Passerby6497 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

No, it doesn't need sms for 2fa, that's the entire point of google authenticator. But tons of users are technologically ignorant and just don't grok how TOTP 2fa works. So Google included the least secure option for 2fa with the reasoning that something is better than nothing.

As the initial responder pointed out Google is not an SMS company, so it's not super surprising that they outsourced part of the routing process for conventional sms delivery.

[–] TheBat -2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

As the initial responder pointed out Google is not an SMS company, so it's not super surprising that they outsourced part of the routing process for conventional sms delivery.

Yes but that third party's DB was accessible on the web. With SMS from mid-2023 in it.

Even if Google wanted to use their services, they still could've insisted on setting up the database, having their engineers remote access to it.

They just signed the contract, did bare minimum, and washed their hands off it instead of taking responsibility of their data.

That's what I meant by outsourcing security.

Edit: The server should've been purging the old data after 14 or 30 days.