302

DNA companies should receive the death penalty for getting hacked | TechCrunch (techcrunch.com)

submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

51 comments fedilink hide all child comments

DNA companies should receive the death penalty for getting hacked | TechCrunch::Personal data is the new gold. The recent 23andMe data breach is a stark reminder of a chilling reality -- our most intimate, personal information might

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 69 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Maybe you shouldn't use the same user+pass across dozens of different services then.

The data from 23 and Me was stolen using the legitimate login credentials of users acquired from an entirely different services data breach. Not via their own lax security policies.

You can't expect a corporation to protect you from yourself. And they certainly shouldn't be punished for your ineptitude.

Don't get me wrong, these corporations are not your friends, and shouldn't be trusted implicitly; but you have some responsibilities too.

/edit:

But when the chips are down and our data is leaked, they hide behind the old “we were not hacked; it was the users’ old passwords” excuse.

This logic is equivalent to a bank saying, “It’s not our fault your money got stolen; you should have had a better lock on your front door.” It’s unacceptable and a gross abdication of responsibility.

I completely disagree with this point. The service obviously has to provide you with access to your information/account. If you give out your login credentials for that access to a third party (another service), that third party loses your information, and it's then used to access stuff posing as you. That's your fault. You should not have shared (re-used) those same login credentials with others.

[-] bandario@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 1 year ago

You nailed it. Users cannot be trusted to not re-use login credentials.

I know we all hate it, but proper 2-factor authentication via authenticator apps must be the default position for everything.

[-] spudwart@spudwart.com 1 points 1 year ago

Legit have had conversations with people where they position themselves as superior because they use "the same password" but with an @ instead of an a, or an extra 0 at the end.

Password Managers are really the best solution to using 1 password everywhere without actually putting yourself at risk. 1 password, to unlock the manager, that lets you copy/paste logins.

But nope 99% of all bullshit I experience in my friends and family is "but thats too complicated" or "thats too hard" when its 200% fucking not.

I'm calling them out. These are shit excuses for what their real issue is which is "i don't wanna change my habits" which is just childish and ignorant.

Even if its easier, even if its safer. If its different, then they don't want to even try it.

There are some people who will have "always used" a spoon to dig holes, and if you showed them a shovel, they'd complain that it's too hard or too complex, and go back to using the spoon.

[-] chatokun@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

I work in IT and don't want to have to use annoying long passwords, so I've been team mfa for at least a decade now. I had physical code devices for SWOTR and FFXIV until I got a software one for the latter. I don't play the former much but I still have a working physical key somewhere.

In fact, I'm more annoyed when a service still uses texting your phone and no option to use a mfa app.

[-] Rinox@feddit.it 22 points 1 year ago

Well they should have 2fa, but yes, if that's the case I agree with you.

Use Bitwarden or KeePass

[-] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Unfortunately, even that's not enough. That's often a user choice to enable, and otp itself is a flawed system. (be that email, sms, or timed)

Really, services should be transitioning to Passkeys, however adoption of a new standard always takes time. There are not a huge number of services that have implemented them yet. Here's a list

[-] YoorWeb@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

While a one-time passcode can be lost or stolen, nobody can steal your face.

[-] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 year ago

TOTP is better than no TOTP/2FA.

[-] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

It sure is. My point is that users often don't enable 2fa even when available, while those that do are still at risk anyway.

Id rather see a much less flawed system implemented, particularly for important services like ones that store your genetic code.

[-] PowerCore7@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

The first link is basically an "advertisment hidden in a normal, professional-looking article". All they're saying is how these ways are not secure, but most importanly, how their solution is more secure, published under their own site.

When you take this into account, their claims start to break down: while yes, email and SMS MFA might be inherently less secure since the code could be transmitted via an insecure channel, saying TOTP is not not secure because "you device can be hacked" is a kinda bad take: if your device is already hacked, you'd have a much bigger problem: even if you are using security keys, the hacker would already have access to whatever service you might be trying to protect. As for the lost/stolen case mentioned in the article, if you put TOTP code in a password manager (as most would probably do if they're doing this), that shouldn't be a problem. The only way this would be a problem is that the TOTP secret is stored in plain text, which would be the same for any authentication methods.

[-] Rinox@feddit.it 3 points 1 year ago

Thanks for the link, I wanted to read up on passkeys since the other day, as GitHub asked me to set one up with Bitwarden

[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't like passkeys. There's the old thing about good security being the thing you have, the thing you know, and the thing you are–a key, a password, and biometrics. I don't like keys or biometrics for anything online. Mainly because of 5th amendment issues (police can hold your finger to your phone to unlock it, but they cannot compell you to say what your password is), but also because either it's more secure than using a password (if you lose the thing you have, you're fucked) or it's the same as using a password (if you lose the thing you have, you can enter a password to get it back).

Why can't we just normalize memorizing complex passwords? It isn't that hard if you dedicate some effort to it instead of lazily making it Currentmonth123!$

[-] Rinox@feddit.it 6 points 1 year ago

Why can't we just normalize memorizing complex passwords? It isn't that hard if you dedicate some effort to it instead of lazily making it Currentmonth123!$

This is just a stupid take. I bet you either reuse your passwords regularly or you don't really use the internet that much. I just looked it up and I have 270 unique logins, with as many 20 characters long passwords, with letters numbers and special characters.

Now tell me with a straight face that you think everyone can memorize that.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I currently have 75 different accounts stored, each with a unique 16 character randomized password. My memory cannot handle remembering each one alongside their username and which service they are used for. I don't think it's reasonable to expect anyone to.

You are not required to secure passkeys with biometrics, you can just use a password to encrypt them if you want, removing the possibility of forced unlock.

With that many logins, I use a password manager anyway. Regardless of whether I use passwords or passkeys; that is always going to be target. With passkeys, that manager+my device are only possible targets to gain access to my accounts. With passwords every service is also a target, along with every connection I make to that service.

A random example: If I login to twitter with a password using a work computer, that password is more than likely now sitting in a log file on the corporate firewall that performs https inspection. That could be used to gain access to my account later.

Replace that password with a passkey, and now there's no ability to harvest and use login info from those logs. All they saw was the passkey challenge and response sent back/fourth with no ability to replicate it later.

While yes, you can usually recover you passkeys with a password and the appropriate access to the systems where they are backed up; the difference is very rarely using a password as a recovery code, vs using a password regularly giving much more opportunity for it to be intercepted or mishandled. The systems my password manager backs up to are also my own and not publicly accessible. (you don't have to use google/apples managers)

Also the passwords used for account auth are stored in my password manager, where as my password managers password is only stored in my mind. One is easy to remember, 75 is a bit much...

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 0 points 1 year ago

Passkeys are not better than a well implemented password. The fact that you cannot use 2fa on top of a passkey actually makes it a worse solution overall.

Passkeys raise the minimum... but at the same time lower the maximum security a user can choose to utilize. I will not personally accept any solution that lowers the maximum level of security I can have.

[-] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Several services do allow you to use MFA alongside passkeys, that's up to the service, not the technology. Google, Github, Nvidia, and Microsoft to name a few.

Passkeys are better than passwords as they cannot be stolen from the service you are logging into, or the network connection between you and the service as they are never transmitted. They can only be stolen directly from the users device (or their passkey/password manager). They are also encrypted and often stored behind biometric authentication locally making them extremely difficult to access even with physical access to the device.

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Passkeys are better than passwords as they cannot be stolen from the service you are logging into

A well implemented password also cannot be stolen. Only a hash of that password. Which would be equivalent to the public key, since it's derived from the private key of the passkey. Much like the hash of a password is derived from the password.

biometric authentication

is bullshit. You must be able to revoke something in order for it to be effective as a password. Revoke your fingerprint... I'll wait. Making it one factor is fine, making it the only factor is fucking moronic.

making them extremely difficult to access even with physical access to the device.

Which makes it the same "factor" as most MFA implementations. Something I have and something I have is not effective for adding security to something. Multi-factor isn't having many of the same factor. It's covering multiple factors.

Edit:

Google, Github, Nvidia, and Microsoft to name a few.

Google!!! the company that automatically creates passkeys without your authorization. BTW... my google account IS MFA configured... The Passkey login on my phone SKIPS Mfa... So your list is already dead with the biggest and first item on your list.

[-] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

A well implemented password also cannot be stolen. Only a hash of that password.

Presuming it was hashed before transmission which it often is not. It can still be stolen during transit, directly from the user, or from poorly implemented processing/storage practices on part of the service which you have no control over and no ability to audit. You can have all the best practices as a user, and still be screwed over by a services poor practices.

Passkeys guarantee to reduce this to a single possible target of theft: The users device.

You as a user have no control or even insight into how a service implements password based auth. All you can do is use a unique complex password and hope they do the right things to keep it secure. Just by using a passkey though, you can know for sure that you are in control of it being kept secure as it never leaves your possession.

Biometric auth is only used to secure the keys on the local device, ontop of the devices own auth.

By MFA, I was refering to all the other factors you can apply just like typical password+2fa. Email, sms, timed, physical key, etc. You have all of the same additional options ontop of replacing passwords with a more secure option. I'm not saying bio+passkey is MFA. Bio is used to access the passkey then MFA is applied to the service itself through whatever other means you've enabled. Hell, you can use your password as the secondary MFA option if the service has enabled that.

load more comments (10 replies)

[-] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Saw your edit:

It was an example list of companies that allow MFA alongside passkeys, not a list of people with perfect practices. You seemed to think MFA wasn't even a possibility.

Every company implements things differently. Google establishes 'trust' once you've signed into a device and doesn't ask for 2fa after that. It'll usually prompt you for it on any new-to-your-account device.

Regardless, that's issue with googles implementation of Passkeys, not Passkeys themselves.

[-] Doxatek@mander.xyz 54 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I worked at McDonald's to be able to afford to go to college and they sold my fingerprint data. I got like 50 dollars in the mail for compensation. Always thought that was fucked. They probably made more selling it all than the settlement was. I should've gotten a lot

[-] tiny_electron@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 year ago

I am honestly surprised you got anything at all

[-] Doxatek@mander.xyz 5 points 1 year ago

Honestly same as well

[-] sramder@lemmy.world 49 points 1 year ago

I swear this headline was just a comment the last time this got posted...

[-] Garbanzo@lemmy.world 44 points 1 year ago

This logic is equivalent to a bank saying, “It’s not our fault your money got stolen; you should have had a better lock on your front door.”

Isn't that exactly what the bank would tell you if someone stole your personal info from your home and used it to empty your account?

This author is a dumbass.

[-] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 year ago

It seems to me like the biggest problem was that in accessing just 14,000 accounts, they got some amount of personal information of nearly 7 million people. Less "you should have had a better lock on your front door" and more "your neighbor's cousin should have had a better lock on his front door."

[-] totallynotarobot@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And a little of the old "it's really your fault for listening to us when we said you didn't need a better lock because wE tAkE cUsToMeR pRiVaCy VeRy SeRiOuSlY."

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

The 23andMe breach saw hackers gaining access to a whopping 6.9 million users’ personal information, including family trees, birth years and geographic locations. It brings to the fore a few significant questions: Are companies really doing enough to protect our data? Should we trust them with our most intimate information?

Well . . . NO. But that has never not been the case. These fucking cheese-brained twits who pour out every scrap of personal - and genetic! - info to the tatty basket of whatever Zuckerberg their moron friends are using has been a problem from day one.

Nothing has changed. Google is evil, Twitter went fascist, facepals is an arm of the FSB, and All Your Genes Are Belong To Us. No fucking shit.

Using computers for everything requires understanding them and most. People. Don’t.

[-] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I like entertaining the idea that purchasing technology should require some form of license like a firearm.

The only problem with the idea is that I would probably be out of a job pretty quick, given no one would be able to use computers.

[-] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago

I had to explain where the windows key is.
That says enough.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] WashedOver@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 year ago

Many of my friends and family sent their DNA away to these outfits. Early on I just ruled it out as I heard they were able to link cold cases to people in these databases. Combine that with the grave miscarriages of justice when they railroad people into convictions my "I haven't done anything to worry about" still did not want to be a part of that machine.

I didn't even think of this reality which is pretty bad. I'm glad I didn't sign up despite some interest in knowing more about my fractured family connections.

[-] Mamertine@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

They don't need your DNA to connect you to solve a cold case. They determine we shares tiny chunks of DNA with a sample from a crime. With that, they find the family tree of the known person and can often determine who the guilty party is.

As in they know the suspect shares a paternal great grandfather with this person and a maternal great great grandmother with that person so we know it's one of these people. Then the police collect trash to find who from the limited pool the crime DNA belongs to.

[-] PopcornPrincess@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

That’s some Minority Report type shit, scary stuff.

[-] abbotsbury@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Collecting evidence after a crime is the opposite of Minority Report.

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 5 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

The recent 23andMe data breach is a stark reminder of a chilling reality – our most intimate, personal information might not be as secure as we think.

The 23andMe breach saw hackers gaining access to a whopping 6.9 million users’ personal information, including family trees, birth years and geographic locations.

Government overreach is certainly a possibility, as the FBI and every policing agency in the world is probably salivating at the thought of getting access to such a huge data set of DNA sequences.

This logic is equivalent to a bank saying, “It’s not our fault your money got stolen; you should have had a better lock on your front door.” It’s unacceptable and a gross abdication of responsibility.

The fact that the stolen data was advertised as a list of people with ancestries that have, in the past, been victims of systemic discrimination, adds another disturbing layer to this debacle.

I’ve long argued that after the Equifax breach, the company should have received the corporate equivalent of the death penalty.

The original article contains 734 words, the summary contains 171 words. Saved 77%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] Chickenstalker@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Bring out the guillotines!

[-] alienanimals@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Life in prison for the executives.

[-] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Because users used bad passwords and had their accounts logged into by with these legitimate passwords...?

Seems like misinformed outrage to me.

[-] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago

Read DNS and wondered why those are supposed for that to happen lol.

In regards to the headline: Just don't use that service and discourage anyone in the family?
Seems more like a gimmick to me.
If I'd need something like that, I'd go to a professional lab.

load more comments

this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2023

302 points (89.1% liked)

Technology

60123 readers

3948 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