Slashdot Mirror


Stolen Adobe Passwords Were Encrypted, Not Hashed

rjmarvin writes "The hits keep coming in the massive Adobe breach. It turns out the millions of passwords stolen in the hack reported last month that compromised over 38 million users and source code of many Adobe products were protected using outdated encryption security instead of the best practice of hashing. Adobe admitted the hack targeted a backup system that had not been updated, leaving the hacked passwords more vulnerable to brute-force cracking."

3 of 230 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Am I imagining it? by gnasher719 · · Score: 3, Informative

    It wouldn't matter if users just followed best practices for password selection.

    It still matters. First, badly chosen passwords are made _obvious_ to hackers; when two or three or a dozen people choose the same password that's a high probability that the password was bad in the first place. And second, losing 30 million passwords makes brute force worthwhile. If you have an algorithm that would crack one password in 30 years on average, it will find passwords in a set of 30 million at a rate of one every minute.

  2. Re:Am I imagining it? by TheNastyInThePasty · · Score: 3, Informative

    Hashing + Salting = Problem Solved.

    --
    The best thing about UDP jokes is I don't care if you get them or not
  3. Re:Am I imagining it? by blueg3 · · Score: 4, Informative

    There's another major difference, for large password-database leaks. Salted hashes can't be computed for all leaked passwords at the same time, they need to be computed once per salt. That means that cracking the whole password database at once is, computationally, just as hard as cracking each password individually. With unsalted hashes, cracking the whole password database is as hard as cracking a single password. With this password database, that's a difficulty difference of a factor of 30 million, which is pretty substantial.