Slashdot Mirror


LastPass Reporting a Security Breach, Including Authentication Hashes and Salts

hawkeyeMI writes: LastPass, the popular password manager, has been hacked. The company says that the “vast majority” of users are safe, and has posted a notice which begins: "We want to notify our community that on Friday, our team discovered and blocked suspicious activity on our network. In our investigation, we have found no evidence that encrypted user vault data was taken, nor that LastPass user accounts were accessed. The investigation has shown, however, that LastPass account email addresses, password reminders, server per user salts, and authentication hashes were compromised."

145 of 206 comments (clear)

  1. Heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Store it on "the cloud"! Everything will be fine!

    1. Re:Heh by Jawnn · · Score: 5, Informative

      Store it on "the cloud"! Everything will be fine!

      And guess what? If you used even the most basic security hygiene, especially with your LastPass master password, it still is.

  2. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by EmeraldBot · · Score: 4, Informative

    Who the fuck would think it's smart to use some web service like that, where some third party ends up with your passwords, even if they are encrypted in some way?

    They're very handy for websites that have poor native security, as the passwords Lastpass generates are extremely tough. In a lot of cases, I'd rather trust Lastpass's security over that of a native website, and they have open sourced their client side decryption process as well (which has received several audits). I don't use it for anything I consider super sensitive (my bank account, for example), but it's pretty good for a lot of other applications.

    --
    "Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
  3. Re:My Brain by Sowelu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's very hard to hack, but susceptible to data loss.

  4. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    They're very handy for websites that have poor native security

    Like lastpass.com?

  5. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 2

    I know. That's just a disaster waiting to happen. "We got hacked." "You don't say ..."

    For the first and last time:

    ANYTHING on the internet is NOT secure

    Use a local password manager.

  6. KeePassX by smutt · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'd like to take this time to recommend an excellent open source project called KeePassX.

    https://www.keepassx.org/

    It's a password vault application. Remember local applications, they run on your computer, that you physically have to be at to use(usually).

    --
    The Information Revolution will be fought on the command line.
    1. Re:KeePassX by ericloewe · · Score: 1

      Why not the real Keepass?

    2. Re:KeePassX by kosmosik · · Score: 3, Interesting

      > https://www.keepassx.org/ [keepassx.org]

      > It's a password vault application. Remember local applications,
      > they run on your computer, that you physically have to be at to use(usually).

      Usually Keepass and alike are used to store passwords for network services. So the computer storing your passwords in KeepassX is still networked and susceptible to attacks. Also people tend to use multiple machines (sometime even not own) so in order to use KeepassX you still need to transfer its data file somehow. You could keep this file on a pendrive probably with portable version of the app.

      So KeepassX in my opinion is less convinient to use than Lastpass - with the latter I just login to service (using two factor authentication) and access my passwords. But mind you I use Keepass only for not-so-sensitive accounts like 100+ eshops, forums and crap like thant (not financial, medical, otherwise sensitive, essential internet authentication account hubs like Google or Facebook).

      So for me in order to use Keepass would be to carry a medium with data file (which can be lost, stolen, copied) or to share the data file via some kind of authenticated network service like SFTP, HTTPS, Dropbox etc.

      I know the Keepass/local pass file way would be probably slightly more secure but Lastpass method is just more convinient.

      Oh and if I were to use password manager I would not go Keepass way - what for? Passwords are just some lines in text file. I would just use encrypted text file, shell utilities like grep and have access to it via SSH with two way authentication (I love Google Authenticator with PAM module for my private use).

      My point being that if used correctly (only for not sensitive accounts, two form authentication enabled) a trusted service like Lastpass (I find them very concerned about security - they are targeted all the time) is quite secure and more convinient that Keepass.

      Also I would love to have some offline device for my sensitive stuff like financial, medical and so on - I lone for something in form of small ipod-like MP3 player that can be fed with data and when prompted for authentication I could choose my credentials from it and display it would generate QR code with token that could be scanned via webcam to authenticate. Of coure it would be suspectible to MITM attacks and physical loss but in my opinion it would be the most secure way for using password store without sharing it via network.

    3. Re:KeePassX by irrational_design · · Score: 1

      I tried it, but it was such a pain to get working on OSX and iOS that I think I eventually gave up. It seems like a great solution if you are Windows centric.

    4. Re:KeePassX by dissy · · Score: 1

      Also people tend to use multiple machines (sometime even not own) so in order to use KeepassX you still need to transfer its data file somehow. You could keep this file on a pendrive probably with portable version of the app.

      and

      Also I would love to have some offline device for my sensitive stuff like financial, medical and so on - I lone for something in form of small ipod-like MP3 player that can be fed with data and when prompted for authentication I could choose my credentials from it and display it would generate QR code with token that could be scanned via webcam to authenticate.

      The other day I went to portableapps.com to rebuild a new toolstick when I remembered they sell pre-loaded flash drives also. Seeing as part of that purchase would support portable apps I figured I would check out the prices in their shop.

      It was then I saw they have a new (to me) encrypted flash drive that looks and reads to be pretty impressive.

      Flash drive #2, the Carbide:
      http://portableapps.com/shop/h...

      Or if you just want the drive from the source without the portable apps involvement:
      http://worldsbestflashdrive.co...

      I only just purchased one for myself last Friday so it hasn't arrived yet, but now I intend to do similar to what you had in mind - my portable keepass app and database, and important documents like taxes and medical records.

      May be worth looking into for those occasions LastPass isn't suitable, primarily for me being document files.

      Also for what it's worth I fully agree with your comparison of keepass and lastpass strengths, and am saying that as an avid keepass user. I'm not here to convert you, just wanted to share a third option that I'm still a bit excited for finding.

    5. Re:KeePassX by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      It that because it's a password vault, not just a simple password safe?

    6. Re:KeePassX by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      I've been very happy with STRIP from Zetetic. I have nothing to do with them except being a happy customer from back in the Palm days. The only thing I don't like is that they charge for their iPhone and iPad versions so I just run the iPhone version on my iPad and it works fine.

    7. Re:KeePassX by rtb61 · · Score: 2

      I would recommend that people install network alarms. All networks will have a particular set of data transmission patterns, that are accept and normal. The very first time a data packet contains a binary signature of an undesirable pattern (instruction, unexpected data transmission), that connection should be blocked at the router, a signal sent to a monitoring station and the connection either allowed to continue or blocked. There are quite simply some data packets, with their embedded binary signatures that should not exist when the system is functioning normally and that connection should be immediately terminated. It would mean slowing down the network to cache and inspect packets as a series to get a better feel for the content but in security terms it would be worthwhile.

      Some instructions should simply not be occurring and when they do, the system needs to block them, how radical the block will depend upon the instruction risk and it's source. The best thing to monitor the activities of a computer is another computer and there are a range of computer instruction that should simply never appear on a normally functioning computer network.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    8. Re:KeePassX by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      There are plug-ins for Keepass that allow you to sync your database file with a cloud service. I use Google because they support 2FA, and even if the file was somehow stolen it's encrypted.

      Keepass has one major advantage over Lastpass's encryption, which is that you can use a keyfile as well as a password. I keep the keyfile locally on my machines and my phone, and it's innocuous so even if one of them was hacked it's doubtful anyone would bother stealing it. Even if they did, how would they know which of the thousands of files on each device was the keyfile?

      This way updates to the database are synced via the cloud, but the database is inaccessible even if the cloud is compromised.

      The other big security win for Keepass is that it doesn't run in the browser. If your browser is compromised the Lastpass plug-in could be interfered with, or even replaced by a fake look-a-like. Having the app run outside the browser is a good idea.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:KeePassX by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      Everything is a security/convenience consideration.

      KeePass is more secure than LastPass, if you are careful with how you store your database.
      Having your passwords as similar but reasonably strong password is more convenient, but less secure.
      Setting your password to 12345, is even more convenient but... idiots and luggage...

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  7. Hash and Salt by psyclone · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We are confident that our encryption measures are sufficient to protect the vast majority of users. LastPass strengthens the authentication hash with a random salt and 100,000 rounds of server-side PBKDF2-SHA256, in addition to the rounds performed client-side. This additional strengthening makes it difficult to attack the stolen hashes with any significant speed.

    Salting is nice, but when the attacker gets both the hash and the salt, they can attack specific users. Still, the 100k rounds of SHA256 seem decent.

    Would bcrypt be any better than PBKDF2 here?

    1. Re:Hash and Salt by dwywit · · Score: 1

      But do they use ROT-13 as well?

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    2. Re:Hash and Salt by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      If it's corned beef hash, you really don't need the salt.

    3. Re:Hash and Salt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, and scrypt would be even better than that.
      Look here, there is a comparison between the three on page 14.

    4. Re:Hash and Salt by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

      100,000 rounds of ROT-13!

    5. Re:Hash and Salt by blueg3 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Salting is nice, but when the attacker gets both the hash and the salt, they can attack specific users.

      Of course they can. The entire purpose of salting is to make it so that the same password, hashed two different times, produces completely different hashes. This has two important consequences. First, it makes it basically impossible to precompute password hashes. That's a big deal compared to the "without salt" case, where rainbow tables make checking against precomputed hashes very easy. Second, if two users on a system have the same password, you can't tell without computation. Said another way, it means you need to crack passwords individually rather than in bulk. This isn't game-breaking, but it's significant when you have million-user breaches.

      All of the typical ways of storing password hashes store the salt alongside it. It's expected that an attacker that obtains the hash will obtain the salt. It's within the design.

      If you want the password hash separate from a piece of key password-validation data, at that point the extra piece of data is a secret and what you're basically making is a message authentication code. But, it's very difficult to argue that this is ever really more secure.

      Still, the 100k rounds of SHA256 seem decent.

      Would bcrypt be any better than PBKDF2 here?

      100k rounds of SHA256 is decent. The longer SHA2 variants are better, sure. More rounds is always better, of course. 100k is better than what most people use. But, if the decryption is always happening client-side (which it should), then ideally you can afford and should use many more rounds of SHA1. Maybe if they're using JavaScript, that limits how high they can jack the number of rounds up and still get reasonable performance on low-end devices.

      I don't know that bcrypt is necessarily much better than what they're doing. It may be, but at a "details" level, not a "major benefit" level. Both bcrypt and PBKDF2 support many rounds and prevent precomputation, which are major features.

      What would be better, if the devices they want to support can run it, is something like scrypt, which is resistant to hardware acceleration and thus much harder to crack in practice.

    6. Re:Hash and Salt by sexconker · · Score: 1

      p>All of the typical ways of storing password hashes store the salt alongside it. It's expected that an attacker that obtains the hash will obtain the salt. It's within the design.

      If you want the password hash separate from a piece of key password-validation data, at that point the extra piece of data is a secret and what you're basically making is a message authentication code. But, it's very difficult to argue that this is ever really more secure.

      The hash, salt, and user name are all considered to be not secret. In a properly-implemented crypto scheme, having all of those will allow not help you to gain access to the account or crack the password.

    7. Re:Hash and Salt by N1AK · · Score: 1

      I always assumed the per user salt was purely to make using a hash table much harder (effectively impossible), in which case it would still be effective.

    8. Re:Hash and Salt by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      A hacker could go through all that trouble to reverse a hash but if the user changes the master password, then there's no compromise. So...the race is to have the user change passwords before the hacker hacks the hash. Should be easy to win, no?

      Also, use two-factor. Seriously. No reason you shouldn't be using two-factor.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    9. Re:Hash and Salt by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Salting helps but not as much as you might hope. The cracking process usually goes like this:

      1. Try the top 100 common passwords on every user, with a few simple variations. That will net you maybe 50-60% of accounts.

      2. Check if any users are also in other, weaker or already cracked databases. Often they will be using the same password, or a simple variation of it. That gets you to maybe 80%.

      3. Sort the remaining targets by value. Users with .gov addresses at the top, then email accounts that don't support 2FA. Run more comprehensive dictionary attacks against them. Maybe use Amazon to speed the process up. That will get you to around 90-95%.

      Unfortunately telling users to change their passwords won't help much either, because often they just use some trivial variation or another one of the two-three usual ones they have, or just pick another bad one that was on the top 100 list anyway.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:Hash and Salt by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      That situation is partially the result of more widespread use of salt. It doesn't magically make bad password hard to crack (as you point out). But it used to be the case that, with rainbow tables, you could crack even moderately difficult passwords very quickly. It also adds a pretty substantial slowdown for large password breaches -- even though all the easy passwords will be cracked anyway, a factor of hundreds of thousands slowdown starts changing the "easily crackable" threshold.

    11. Re:Hash and Salt by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      Only if encrypted used data really wasn't exfiltrated.

    12. Re:Hash and Salt by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      Yes, that's what I was saying. Salting uses a non-secret nonce. You could set up some system with a secret nonce, but then it would be a different construction than "salt" (and hard to argue that it's better).

      Having access to the salt does make it much easier to crack the password. In fact, it's basically necessary to crack the password. It is still considered non-secret, though.

    13. Re:Hash and Salt by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      1. Try the top 100 common passwords on every user, with a few simple variations. That will net you maybe 50-60% of accounts.

      2. Check if any users are also in other, weaker or already cracked databases. Often they will be using the same password, or a simple variation of it. That gets you to maybe 80%.

      3. Sort the remaining targets by value. Users with .gov addresses at the top, then email accounts that don't support 2FA. Run more comprehensive dictionary attacks against them. Maybe use Amazon to speed the process up. That will get you to around 90-95%.

      You missed one. A modern password cracker now handles variations as part of the attack.

      They use mask attacks because most passwords with "numbers and symbols and capitals" don't really add much entropy to test.

      For example, lets say the password enforces at least 1 number, and you know the password is lower case. Well, in theory, you'd have to check 36^password_length to brute force, but you may only need to check 26^password_length + 10 passwords. Or less. If you do a dictionary attack, you only have to test 10 times more variations - e.g., if you're testing "apple" as the password, the cracker will test "apple", "apple0", "apple1" ... "apple9" and then move on to the next password because most people will do that. A more informed cracker might also try "app1e", "appl3" and "app13".

      This remarkably shrinks the keyspace to search down considerably and pretty much renders all the "special symbols, numbers, capitals" moot. If you add a capital, almost always it will be "Apple" and not "aPple" or any other variant.

    14. Re:Hash and Salt by kirkb · · Score: 1

      Noob. Everybody knows that you need an odd number of ROT-13's to be truly secure.

      --
      Slashdot: come for the pedantry, stay for the condescension.
    15. Re:Hash and Salt by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      > and not "aPple" or any other variant

      shit, now I have to change my password.

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    16. Re:Hash and Salt by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      I have noticed that numbers and punctuation like ! and $ are left unmodified after a password is ROT13d. Does that mean I should avoid such characters in my password and only use letters to be truly secure?

  8. Re:Duh. by tnk1 · · Score: 1

    People store passwords in the Cloud all the time.

    Just not in the same place. :)

  9. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 1

    I know. That's just a disaster waiting to happen. "We got hacked." "You don't say ..."

    For the first and last time:

    ANYTHING on the internet is NOT secure

    Use a local password manager.

    I agree with you - but i must add, even if i may sound "paranoid", while i understand how convenient it is: don't use a (local) password manager... use your (brain's) memory!

    --
    Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
  10. Re:Duh. by khasim · · Score: 1

    On the other hand, this should also provide you with a list of the sites where you should be changing your password.

    Hopefully everyone will manage to do that before any of the hashes are cracked (if the crackers managed to get both the algorithm and salt).

  11. ssh into kpcli by Hadley123456 · · Score: 1

    I find ssh'ing into my own raspberry pi with keepass-cli http://sourceforge.net/project... the best way to get passwords so far. Slow but trustworthy. I sure wish that was not a sourceforge project though.

    1. Re: ssh into kpcli by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If your Pi is on the Internet, then it can be hacked just like these other sites. You'll also probably never notice since I doubt you do security audits or have network intrusion detection.

    2. Re: ssh into kpcli by Hadley123456 · · Score: 1

      I watch the logs its amazing how many attempts to access root their are these days. But ssh is as secure as you could ever hope to be if set up correctly, and its a bare bones, plus I do have added lockout protections above the normal ssh config stuff. Having your passwords on multiple computers (work/home) is a must, and 1 password to rule them all is stupid. I see no other choice.

    3. Re: ssh into kpcli by Hadley123456 · · Score: 1

      for fun I put this in my ~/.bash_login /home/uname/kpcli-2.8.pl --kdb=/home/uname/pass.kdbx || /home/uname/kpcli-2.8.pl --kdb=/home/unamepass.kdbx ||
      ( echo "FAILED LOGIN -`date`." >> FAILED_LOGIN && exit )

      its not really secure because of scp/sftp can bypass bash.

      also sudo crontab -e
      30 4 * * * apt-get update && apt-get -y -d upgrade > /dev/null && echo "sucess! -`date`." >> /root/upgrade

      and watch the logs.

    4. Re: ssh into kpcli by Hadley123456 · · Score: 1

      I should have proof-read that better, remove the "-d" on apt-get update, that is download only, and /kpcli-*.pl.

    5. Re: ssh into kpcli by SethJohnson · · Score: 1

      anything else i can do?

      Modify SSHD config to listen on non-standard port. It will greatly diminish the log traffic you'll see of failed attempts. This could be important if you're using fail2ban as well and don't want your iptables to bloat unreasonably.

      Stay away from configuring port-knocking. It becomes a real pita when you want to scp a file at the spur of the moment.

  12. Karma's a bitch ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1
    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  13. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's just stupid. No one can remember 30+ passwords. And not using unique passwords is the dumbest possible thing (gmail account "hack" from earlier this year)

    So, *sometimes* use your brain.

  14. Re:I believe I have a pile of I-told-you-sos to se by hawkeyeMI · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm the submitter. I'm a LastPass user and I'll stay that way. If you actually read the article you'll see that things are under control. This is the second time LastPass has reported an attack that I can remember, and because of the client-side encryption and so on it's not a huge deal. Bravo to them for their proactive stance and sound methods.

    --
    Error 404 - Sig Not Found
  15. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

    I know. That's just a disaster waiting to happen. "We got hacked." "You don't say ..."

    For the first and last time:

    ANYTHING on the internet is NOT secure

    Use a local password manager.

    Well, now that we have the word of someone that has absolutely no clue how infosec works I guess it's case closed right?

    As far as how secure this service is... well... meh? Who the hell knows. Would I keep the launch codes there? No. My password for that Cartoon network? Sure. The point is, you seem to be claiming that your local hard drive is safer than a websevice literally dedicated to security. That's laughable to say the least. IF this site really is what it claims to be, then it's definitely more secure than your local hard drive, but certainly not as secure as simply memorizing the password.

    The concern I would have immediately would be that you have to trust that vendor. Are they located in the US (or whichever country you live in so you can sue them) and subject to the jurisdiction of US courts should they turn out to be bad actors? And almost more importantly, do they keep all of their data on US servers? Being headquartered in the US but outsourcing your database to China would kind of defeat the purpose right?

    When you get down to it, when you get into big-time security in major corporations, it's not really that you're jumping through lots of hoops to make sure the data is secure. You will ALWAYS fail at that. You just can't stay that on top of things. What you're really doing is trying to ensure that if there is a breach, you can recover from it and that you have someone to sue/blame to pay for the recovery. So you make sure you pick a service that's in the US, and is well insured. Then you leave it up to them and their insurance company to duke out the difference between higher premiums or more security people.

    But if you're just Joe-schmo at home, and you want to store credentials to your netflix accounts and such? And it's a huge well know company like lastpass? Yes, they are more secure than your windows harddrive. A lot more secure. Maybe keep your bank login on a post-it note in the back of your sock drawer just to be safe though.

  16. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

    "Almost everyone has a local password manager... it's commonly referred to as a brain."

    Unfortunately the H. Sapiens Mark I brain is only good at remembering bad passwords. To remember good ones, you need a password manager.

  17. Re: Who the fuck would use something like that? by jd2112 · · Score: 1

    I have a photographic memory. Unfortunately the film is bad.

    --
    Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
  18. Re:My Brain by dsmatthews9379 · · Score: 2
    You know that dream you had about being at work and logging into your admin system? Well... http://www.nature.com/news/sci...

    Using auditory clues to induce dreams about a given topic is not impossible, and if the visual cortex activity can be decoded the simpler motor cortex that plays back your typing movements during password entry could also be decoded.

    Your brain is hackable, with tools other than an axe.

  19. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by mars-nl · · Score: 1

    For people whose brain doesn't work well enough to remember dozens of passwords, you could also use an gpg encrypted text file. Works well for me.

  20. Write only off-site aggregated log server .. by nickweller · · Score: 2

    "We’ve commissioned a write only off-site aggregated log server which can only be accessed via the console. This will allow us a guarantee that any logging is intact." ref

  21. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by blueg3 · · Score: 1

    Few people can memorize a large collection of high-entropy passwords.

    Yes, I know there are strategies for getting away with memorizing fewer. They're not necessarily good ideas.

  22. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by irrational_design · · Score: 1

    That's great advice. Except I have 6 computers in three locations that I use on a daily basis. Putting it on a stick doesn't really work since I'm really good at losing things. Before using an online password manager I used the same 7 character password for everything. Now my password manager has 100s of passwords, allof which are unique and most of which are 30+ characters long. I really don't know what I would do without it.

  23. Passwords in the cloud? I use simple local scripts by 25albert · · Score: 2

    It's a strange idea to store passwords in the cloud anyway. I use these simple scripts in Ubuntu. Could work on Mac too, and I had a Windows/Perl/batch-file version long ago:

    $ cat `which p`
    #!/bin/bash

    [ -d /media/truecrypt1 ] || t on

    # accept up to 3 arguments, and filter on all 3
    if [ -z "$2" ]; then
            grep -ni "$1" /media/truecrypt1/p
    else
            grep -ni "$1" /media/truecrypt1/p | grep -i "$2" | grep -i "$3"
    fi

    $ cat `which padd`
    #!/bin/bash
    [ -d /media/truecrypt1 ] || t on
    echo `date +%F` " $@" >>/media/truecrypt1/p

    And to mount the truecrypt volume:

    $ cat `which t`
    #!/bin/sh

    file=$HOME/timecode
    tcvol=/media/truecrypt1

    do=$1

    case "$do" in
            "on")
            if grep -q /media/truecrypt1

  24. Re:I believe I have a pile of I-told-you-sos to se by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If you have a real argument present it please. I encourage you to understand how LastPass actually works, and not how you think it works based on not reading TFA (obviously from your statement).

  25. Re:Passwords in the cloud? I use simple local scri by 25albert · · Score: 2

    There is a bit missing in the post above:

    $ cat `which t`
    #!/bin/sh

    file=$HOME/timecode
    tcvol=/media/truecrypt1

    do=$1

    case "$do" in
            "on")
            if grep -q /media/truecrypt1 < /proc/mounts ; then
                      logger -t truecrypt "$0 Starting tc: already mounted"
                    exit
            fi
            logger -t truecrypt "$0 Starting tc"
            DISPLAY=:0.0 truecrypt $file ;;
            "off")
            t=$(find $tcvol -type f -printf "%TY-%Tm-%Td %TH:%TM\n" | sort -n | tail -1)
            truecrypt -d
            if [ -n "$t" ] ; then
                    touch -d "$t" $file
                    logger -t truecrypt "$0 Stopped tc and set mtime to $t"
            else
                    logger -t truecrypt "$0 Stopped tc; no mtime to set found"
            fi ;;
            "status")
            truecrypt -t -l ;;
            "*")
            echo "Usage: $0 on|off|status";
            logger -t truecrypt "Bad option '$do' given to $0"
            exit 1; ;;
    esac

  26. People need to settle down... by gbcox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    LastPass of course is going to be a target; but if you used the product as recommended with 2nd factor authentication and not reusing your master password elsewhere you don't have anything to worry about. LastPass is handling this in a measured, logical, efficient manner - and as always, they err on the safe side. Of course, this being the internet, you have the usual suspects crying chicken little, the sky is falling.

    1. Re:People need to settle down... by j-turkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...Of course, this being the internet, you have the usual suspects crying chicken little, the sky is falling.

      They're also smugly saying "I told you so" - and doing so seemingly without understanding the situation. The situation hasn't changed since the beginning: don't use the service if you don't trust the encryption. If the service is breached and the (open source, peer reviewed) encryption stands up to attack, then the threat is astronomically minimal.

      --

      -Turkey

  27. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

    I prefer one GPG file per site. Downside is that it exposes the site name, but also means I only decrypt only a single site password at a time.

    Bonus points for putting the files into a version control system (git/svn/hg) so that you can cleanly sync them between PCs.

    And making backup copies is as easy as stuffing the ASCII armored block into an email. Or printing it out for OCR'ing later...

    --
    Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
  28. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

    I had the same problem as you except I was looking after 70+ computers as a sysadmin about a decade ago. Used to store them on my Palm with a program called STRIP by Zetetic. Now I have their app on my iOS devices. It's not as flashy as LastPass but then it doesn't store all your passwords on the Internet either.

  29. Re: Who the fuck would use something like that? by corychristison · · Score: 1

    I personally use a KeePass 2.x database. I use it across my computers and Android phone.

    For convenience, I use BitTorrent Sync to keep the file updated across devices. I have it set to only sync on the local network(s), instead of over the internet. So, all if I add or change a password at home, it will sync to my phone and laptop via the local network. When I go to my office, when my phone connects to the local wifi it will sync the file to my work computer.

    I use a password and keyfile. I copied the key file over to my devices manually, and is not within the Sync share.

    This is the best security:convenience ratio I could come up with.

  30. The NSA has probably already inserted their by mark_reh · · Score: 1, Insightful

    backdoor into the encryption. It's only a matter of time before hackers locate it and fling it open to let the animals in.

    There are no secrets. There is no privacy.

  31. Re:I believe I have a pile of I-told-you-sos to se by Rich0 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm the submitter. I'm a LastPass user and I'll stay that way. If you actually read the article you'll see that things are under control.

    This is the second time LastPass has reported an attack that I can remember, and because of the client-side encryption and so on it's not a huge deal. Bravo to them for their proactive stance and sound methods.

    Not only that, but even if the encrypted vault were compromised along with the hashes/etc (allowing somebody to start brute-forcing them), I could easily use lastpass to identify all my accounts and the last change date for each. Since almost all my accounts use random passwords changing them all is a bit of a pain, but not too big a deal. I'm just replacing one random string of values with another. I could change all my accounts in a weekend and all the new passwords are synced across my devices.

    Lastpass is extremely convenient and I don't know of many practical alternatives that are any more secure against the same threat models. Maybe a piece of paper in my pocket would be more secure against the remote attacks, but I don't really see that as a step up.

  32. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Anonymous+Psychopath · · Score: 5, Informative

    Who the fuck would think it's smart to use some web service like that, where some third party ends up with your passwords, even if they are encrypted in some way?

    People who understand how LastPass security works.

    LastPass security is actually quite good, and designed to be resilient against data breaches. The attackers haven't gotten any passwords. What they have gotten is hashes, salts, and hints which could lead to passwords, given enough time and computational power.

    The clock started ticking as soon as the attackers obtained the data dump. As soon as I reset my master password, the clock stops ticking. Between those two events is the only window of time the attackers have to brute-force the hash or guess my password based on the hint. As soon as I change my master password as prompted by the LastPass email, they have nothing.

    If you use 2-factor authentication with LastPass, like Google Auth, even if they crack your master password before you change it, they still have nothing.

    --

    Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

  33. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by rahvin112 · · Score: 2, Informative

    By centralizing all the passwords they are a prime target for infiltration. The hackers knew that by taking this one business they would potentially gain access to millions of websites. In a normal attack they have no idea if they will get good data, with LastPass they couldn't miss. That then makes them one of the most high profile targets on the internet and they'd need NSA level security to keep people out. I little internet company with world class security? I don't think so, even Google got hacked with a spear fishing attack.

    I agree with the other posters, you'd have to be nuts to use LastPass for anything that was tied to financial transactions. And just even the secondary effects could be tremendous now that they have login information (depending on the number of websites the last pass information could give them all kinds of information out accounts and names/emails used making the hacking significantly easier).

  34. Re:My Brain by j-turkey · · Score: 1

    Bah, your brain has been proven very susceptible to rubber hose cryptographic attacks.

    --

    -Turkey

  35. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Dan541 · · Score: 1

    I agree with the other posters, you'd have to be nuts to use LastPass for anything that was tied to financial transactions.

    Why? I'd rather my banking credentials be leaked than my email or domain registrar credentials.

    What can a person do with my bank account anyway? Nothing, that can't be traced and/or reversed.

    --
    An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
  36. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Dan541 · · Score: 1

    ANYTHING on the internet is NOT secure

    Use a local password manager.

    A local password manager is just as vulnerable as LastPass, likely more so since few password managers take security as seriously as LasstPass does.

    --
    An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
  37. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Krojack · · Score: 1

    I know. That's just a disaster waiting to happen. "We got hacked." "You don't say ..."

    For the first and last time:

    ANYTHING on the internet is NOT secure

    Use a local password manager.

    I agree with you - but i must add, even if i may sound "paranoid", while i understand how convenient it is: don't use a (local) password manager... use your (brain's) memory!

    Most people who use their brain will pick very easy to remember passwords which are in return easy to guess and hack. I have been changing over to using my YubiKey. Slot 1 is configured for OTP, slot 2 is a 32 character static password of random upper and lowercase letters.

  38. Again by sansprivacy · · Score: 1

    This happened three or four years ago too. I thought lastpass was great until that. I shut my account down immediately. They had a lot going for them, but security wasn't one of them.

  39. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    lastpass seems a little bit strange.

    do they have the ability to look your passwords? there's the ability to reset password but is that only for the "two factor"? they claim the decrypted passwords never leave your device, but they have password reminder questions/system? so what the fuck? they have syncing and that so.. do they have the ability to decrypt the data in lastpass or not?

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  40. LastPass has many 2-factor options by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 4, Informative

    In fact, when I wanted to demo about half a dozen dual-factor solutions for a colleague, I showed them all on my LastPass account.

    1. Re:LastPass has many 2-factor options by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      NSA trading as LastPass says your decrypted keys never leave your local machine.

      Too bad it's closed source and so have to trust them! No, wait...

      (never use closed-source security; the AC has a point, even if he's ignorant on this matter).

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  41. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "What can a person do with my bank account anyway? Nothing, that can't be traced and/or reversed."

    Then you should feel perfectly safe posting your bank credentials on this site.

  42. Re:Passwords are for luddites. by KGIII · · Score: 1

    You know, we called applications 'apps' long before the invention of the cell phone or the proliferation of the smart phone. In other words, your disdain for the word is a bit silly as it has been a part of our lexicon for quite some time.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  43. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by KGIII · · Score: 3, Interesting

    My niece has a friend (this is, sadly, a true story) who got their first credit card. She was pleased and activated it. She was so excited, and I kid you not, she took a picture of this card and posted it to her Facebook account. I am not sure how they got the 3 or 4 digit number on the back of the card (or if they did) but it took less than a day for the card to reach its limits and, sadly, she is not being held liable for the fraudulent transactions. Some folks should not be allowed credit cards or internet access. My point is, I suppose, that people do not understand even basic security.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  44. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by KGIII · · Score: 1

    I have a "universal" password. It basically remains much the same for every site but it is complex and varies per site.

    Examples (not real, obviously):

    myp@$$W0RD18117tSlashdot
    myp@$$W0RD18117tGmail

    This has flaws, obviously, but brute force attacks are a small risk as is guessing based on intimate knowledge of me. Of course, if they get one they can get the rest. I attempt to mitigate this by having multiple combinations that I recall easily. If I am unable to remember the password then I just move on to the next format and try that one. I have maybe a dozen that I move through. Some of them include things like the year and I will change the password at the end of that year to a new one. Obviously my above examples are sanitized - they are not real examples.

    My system is not perfect, none of them are, but it is one that has worked for me with no known security failures. If I am on a trip then I typically use VNC (encrypted and password protected) and do any serious things from a dedicated computer at home. My feeling is that it does not have to be hard to remember for it to be difficult to guess.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  45. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by KGIII · · Score: 1

    I do not know... My security here, on my network, may well be better than that at some unknown company. I, for example, do not have to allow inbound traffic from millions of people. I can stop all inbound traffic that does not originate on my network. I do not have to have constantly running services that may have exploits of their own. I can encrypt all my stored data. I can use a VPN. I can even create my own VPN. I am able to configure a hard or soft firewall to very explicitly cover only my needs and do so myself so that I needn't worry about someone else configuring it properly on my behalf.

    I can not say that my network is more secure than this one in the article. What I can say is that it probably is - I have no known attacks that have been successful. I do have a number of intrusion attempts in my logs. I can not be certain that I have not been successfully attacked but it is unlikely. I may not be more secure, which is a process - not an application, than this particular company (it is possible) but I am certainly more secure than the vast majority of online servers. I am also likely more secure than the lastpass site as well. Of course I am far less a target than they are - and I am certain I am vulnerable somewhere (beyond physical attacks).

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  46. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by execthis · · Score: 1

    Everything is a prime target for infiltration. So are my online banks. But we all use online banks because we believe that we can and should be able to. Are we just going to give up doing everything because everything is vulnerable and a target? Or do we just do what we do and do it with the most care and attention to security that we can?

    I'm sure that Lastpass security is going to be a lot more intense than an average website. And how else are you going to manage the hundreds of dozen-character long, unique, and complex passwords you want to use with each site?

    What Lastpass are doing is simply amazing and is enabling a vast improvement in security (and convenience).

  47. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by execthis · · Score: 1

    And by the way, what are you going to do when your smartphone or laptop is stolen, with all those hundreds of passwords you have saved in your web browser, or else what? put them in a text file? or else used the same passwords for multiple sites? ... as opposed to if you have Lastpass and all you need to do is change your master password and forget about it!

  48. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by execthis · · Score: 2

    LMAO. Your local password manager on your computer which is ON THE INTERNET!

  49. Re: Who the fuck would use something like that? by execthis · · Score: 1

    KeePass is good but their browser add-ons are not as good as Lastpass unfortunately.

  50. Los Dummelos Moronos by dummy14141555 · · Score: 1

    Guys, what is your problem? The only way these guys have ANYTHING is if you use your master password on an actual website other than just logging into your lastpass account. Now, if your master paswoord is boobies, then, you're in trouble. But if you use anything remotely decent, you are fine. Especially if you use 2 factor authentication any time you login outside your known trusted devices the diminishing returns are so low... And unlike most companies, at least LastPass has the integrity to actually tell us when there has been a problem. You know, because that's something that responsible companies SHOULD DO. But mostly, they DON'T.

    1. Re:Los Dummelos Moronos by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      Guys, what is your problem? The only way these guys have ANYTHING is if you use your master password on an actual website other than just logging into your lastpass account.

      Now, if your master paswoord is boobies, then, you're in trouble.

      Until you change your master password. The threat here is that an attacker could use the email address and master password to retrieve the encrypted file from lastpass servers and then decrypt it using the master password. Two-factor Authentication alone protects against this. But if you have both a strong master password AND 2-Factor then you're not even close to being compromised.

      Since the master password is used for encryption purposes it should always be as strong as you can make it in the first place.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    2. Re:Los Dummelos Moronos by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      Which is why in the bulletin they suggest changing it. I do this on a regular basis. For me it's just early in the cycle so no worries.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    3. Re:Los Dummelos Moronos by Agent0013 · · Score: 1

      How does changing the master password help anything. On a site, you change your password and the old one does not work anymore. With an encrypted database, the old password still works with the old copy of the database. Changing it only works if they got your old password and want to use it on the newly encrypted database. Since they have a copy of the old one, they can take their time cracking the old master password and any amount of changing it will do nothing to remedy that. You would have to change every password you have stored in the database so when they do crack it open none of them work in those sites any longer.

      --

      -- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
    4. Re:Los Dummelos Moronos by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      How does changing the master password help anything.

      It stops the attackers from logging into your account and accessing your database. Once you change the master password it doesn't matter if they crack your salt.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    5. Re:Los Dummelos Moronos by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      With an encrypted database, the old password still works with the old copy of the database. Changing it only works if they got your old password and want to use it on the newly encrypted database.

      Except the attackers are not believed to have accessed any of the databases. In either case I set my master password on the assumption that it will be subjected to offline attacks, as should everyone.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    6. Re:Los Dummelos Moronos by Agent0013 · · Score: 1

      Right, but if they have the database, they don't need to log into anything. They just need to crack the encrypted database, which they have in their hands, and it is still encrypted with the old password. See, changing the password does nothing.

      --

      -- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
    7. Re:Los Dummelos Moronos by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      IF they had the database, but we're not talking about that. We're talking about the current attack.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    8. Re:Los Dummelos Moronos by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      The release says: "we have found no evidence that encrypted user vault data was taken"

      Exactly, so changing you master password will defend against this.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
  51. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by ayesnymous · · Score: 1

    In a lot of cases, I'd rather trust Lastpass's security over that of a native website,

    You would be trusting that Lastpass's security is NEVER broken though, because once it's broken, they have ALL your passwords. If only one native website is broken though, then only one of your passwords has been taken.

  52. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by johanw · · Score: 1

    You have offline solutions for that, like KeePass. I'd rather go with the extra hassle of having to sync the KeePass database myself than being dumb enough to put it on some cloud service. And no, a KeePass database on Dropbox is almost just as dumb.

  53. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

    brute force attacks are a small risk as is guessing based on intimate knowledge of me

    Well, if I get one of your passwords and know you visit a second site, then I immediately know the password to that second site. Not terribly secure.

  54. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by tsotha · · Score: 1

    I suspect their security is actually pretty good. Just not perfect.

  55. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by johanw · · Score: 1

    At least your computer with your KeePass file is not such a high profile target as the LastPass servers (unless you're Edward Snowden perhaps).

  56. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by tsotha · · Score: 1

    Aha. What? In the US if your banking credentials get out on your end the bank is under no legal obligation to make your account whole. They'll try to reverse transactions, but if the money's gone the money's gone and it's your problem. The fact that the money can be traced to an organized crime syndicate in far-away country where nobody cares is not going to help you much.

  57. Re:My Brain by johanw · · Score: 2

    But it's quite easy to brute force. "So, you didn't like us breaking your finger? You have 9 more to go unless you give us the password".

  58. Re:My Brain by johanw · · Score: 1

    You dream about logging in? You work too hard. :-)

  59. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by thsths · · Score: 3, Informative

    To be honest, the idea that anybody who can see your credit card can take your money is not really security at all. Usually transactions require additional evidence - either the physical card, the PIN, the address, or the security code.

  60. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by execthis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know that a company like Lastpass has paid professionals to maintain infrastructure with strict security, vs. whatever I would be able to muster on my own. I could use Keepass and perhaps sync with my Owncloud server, but then is my security going to be better than theirs? Probably not even close.

    I like the idea of Keepass and have it installed, but their plugins are not as good as Lastpass and using it is kind of cludgy. I have no special allegiance to Lastpass in particular, although I personally think they are probably the best at what they do and have been around the longest and the annual fee - something I'm more than happy to pay knowing they are professionals - it totally reasonable and worth far more than the amount of resources I would have to expend to produce duplicate functionality on my own.

  61. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by N1AK · · Score: 1

    Use a local password manager.

    Because a local machine is inherently unhackable...

    There are plenty of tech-savvy people who use services like LastPass. Of course putting all your passwords in one place, on one server, comes with risks. It also has a few advantages, including: > They notify you of hacks to sites you have passwords stored for > You don't have to type passwords, protecting you from keyloggers If it turns out that the people who've attacked LastPass have information that genuinely puts my passwords at risk then I can change my passwords. I'd assume they are going to generate and apply new per user salts, and everything else declared doesn't overly concern me. If it turns out that someone has the encrypted file containing passwords, and the salt, then I'll change my passwords even though it's almost inconceivable that anyone would take the effort to decrypt the files.

  62. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by N1AK · · Score: 1

    What happens if you lose the device? If it backs them up where does it back them up to, how does it get them to the backup and how secure is it? Without knowing a lot more I'd be equally, or more dubious, of claims that password managers on devices like phones are any more secure overall.

  63. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    What is troubling is that every time you use this credit card over the phone etc, you give out all that personal info just to make the transaction and who says that the person you are talking to is not just putting the details in a chip/pin machine as "card holder not present" but also writing the details down in a notebook to sell/use at a later date as they have just.... got your full name as what's on the card, they have you 16 digit number they have your start date they have your end date and they have the 3 digit CVV code on the back of the card.

  64. Re:Passwords are for luddites. by promythyus · · Score: 1

    I dare say his problem isn't about the recentness of the word "app" but rather the overuse by PR drones.

  65. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Dan541 · · Score: 1

    In a lot of cases, I'd rather trust Lastpass's security over that of a native website,

    If only one native website is broken though, then only one of your passwords has been taken.

    You mean the one password that has been used on every other site.

    --
    An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
  66. Re:Duh. by Dan541 · · Score: 1

    Or you can simply change the one master password and your problem is solved.

    --
    An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
  67. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by GroeFaZ · · Score: 1

    It is possible to remember an arbitrary number of different, safe passwords. My method is to have one password that is short, but hard, in the meaning of impossible to crack by dictionary attack. Think random letters, numbers, the stuff that is hard to memorize. But it's always the same base password, so you will know it by heart eventually. Assuming the website you use the password on hashes the password, that leaves you vulnerable to lookup/rainbow tables, because the base password should be fairly short, below 10 chars.

    To defeat rainbow tables, I salt that password in a way I don't have to memorize but can easily deduce, for example with the site I'm using the password on. Examples: ReallyHardPasswordSlashdot, ReallyHardPasswordGoogle, ReallyHardPasswordSteam, etc. They all are different and not reusable, their hashes are different, they are (hopefully) long enough to be too long for rainbow tables

    --
    The grass is always greener on the other side of the light cone.
  68. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by GroeFaZ · · Score: 1

    Self-reply: Or just use hunter2 for everything, it will show up as ******* for everyone that isn't you.

    --
    The grass is always greener on the other side of the light cone.
  69. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

    I am not sure how they got the 3 or 4 digit number on the back of the card

    only takes a thousand attempts (at worst) to guess that number. You'd hope the card system would block it after 3 or so failed attempts, but you never know if they do.

  70. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by gbjbaanb · · Score: 3, Informative

    And how else are you going to manage the hundreds of dozen-character long, unique, and complex passwords you want to use with each site?

    with an offline tool, like keepass. Same functionality, only stored locally (or on your phone), not on the cloud.

  71. Re:I believe I have a pile of I-told-you-sos to se by nmpg · · Score: 1

    This: rezial.com I admit that I never tried LastPass, so I'm not claiming this is better/more convenient.. I use it, and I'm happy with it. but now I also want to try LastPass :)

  72. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by nctritech · · Score: 1

    Incorrect. Anyone can remember three reasonably secure (read: long and not all lower case) passphrases. Use them in tiers where one is for "I don't care if my Slashdot/Ars Technica/Disqus/TPB account really gets hacked" and one is for "this is an email account that a lot of other accounts can be password reset to hijack, don't use this anywhere but on email accounts that need to be secure" and one is exclusively for bank accounts or other highly sensitive information. That way if "LOL We Use No TLS And MD5 And Store Password Hashes In Cookies Forum" gets hacked and someone cracks your forum account password from the hash, the only risk is to your not-too-important accounts and they don't have your email account password.

    Or your 30 passwords can look like "Mfdajsio[][$#@5625429i04356kio:FSD===-F" and you can trust all of them to a password manager and pray that the one magical master password for that manager doesn't fall into the wrong hands, lest your single point of failure give up a list of all your accounts along with their corresponding passwords.

  73. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by suso · · Score: 1

    No security is perfect, that's why you have need to have a good incident response plan.

  74. Re:I believe I have a pile of I-told-you-sos to se by Rich0 · · Score: 1

    This: rezial.com
    I admit that I never tried LastPass, so I'm not claiming this is better/more convenient.. I use it, and I'm happy with it.

    but now I also want to try LastPass :)

    Will that auto-fill password forms? Also, how is it any more secure? You're still encrypting your password list and storing it on somebody else's server - if somebody obtains the encrypted list they can attempt to brute-force it.

  75. Re:I believe I have a pile of I-told-you-sos to se by Rich0 · · Score: 1

    And if your Lastpass account is ever hacked you'll lose access to all those accounts.

    Well, you can keep backups but obviously if they brute force your encryption key then they can log into all your accounts and change your passwords on you.

    Better to come up with a simple algorithm to generate your password based on the site you're using. No need to store anything. One less 3rd party knowing all the sites you care about. One hack required per account. Automated hacking and data mining tools aren't going to understand your algorithm.

    That has a few challenges:

    1. The algorithm needs to be secure. That likely means you can't do it in your head. It probably also means that you'll want to use a standardized tool which is secure.
    2. You need to be able to run the algorithm from any device you want to access a website from.
    3. If you want auto-fill of password forms (a major timesaver with lastpass) then you need to write a fairly robust application for multiple platforms, which means you'll probably use the same program to run your algorithm everybody else uses.
    4. Your algorithm needs to take into account that a single domain could have multiple passwords, and multiple domains could use a shared password. Again, sounds like a robust tool is needed.
    5. Using standardized tools means that automated brute-forcing becomes a possibility.
    6. Depending on the algorithm, obtaining the password for one site might allow an offline brute-force attack on the algorithm which could yield your other passwords.

    I will agree that one advantage of this sort of approach is that there is no cache of passwords to crack, which means that you have to attack the individual websites which generally means an online attack (throttled, limited attempts, etc). However, see #6 above.

  76. Re:I believe I have a pile of I-told-you-sos to se by Rich0 · · Score: 1

    There's always this: http://www.passwordcard.org/en

    As mentioned, writing down your passwords (which this is just a fancy version of) makes them harder to crack online, but opens you up to a different set of attacks, especially any that involve physically overpowering you.

  77. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by DroolTwist · · Score: 1

    A lot of sites still don't require the three digit code on back (sadly).

  78. Re: Who the fuck would use something like that? by corychristison · · Score: 1

    I agree. I don't use it... just the standalone client on Linux and KeePass2Android on Android.

  79. Re:I don't hate to say it. by dave420 · · Score: 1

    What do you think you told us so? I take it you didn't read the article...

  80. Should I still be worried? by wootcat · · Score: 1

    My master password is 21-characters long. Even with the hashes having been collected, wouldn't it still take this side of forever to brute-force it? Should I still change my master password?

    --
    I'm really a low 5-digit Slashdotter, but this ID is where I am now.
  81. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    How do you sync that between multiple computers, your phone and your tablet?

    Not the same functionality.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  82. Re:I believe I have a pile of I-told-you-sos to se by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    Lastpass is extremely convenient and I don't know of many practical alternatives that are any more secure against the same threat models.

    Keepass with sync to a Google account. Gives you everything Lastpass Premium does for free, and it's more secure to boot. 2FA is free with Google accounts (no need to buy additional hardware), sync to mobile devices is free, and by not running in the browser and allowing you to use an optional keyfile as well as a master password it's more secure.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  83. Re:Duh. by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

    I think it would be prudent to still have a password change/reset policy if you are using something like LastPass. If the individual sites get hacked your account is still compromised.

    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  84. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by MarioXXX · · Score: 1

    I sync via SFTP. You could also sync via dropbox, google drive, or one of the other million things keepass has extensions for.

    Comment Signature

  85. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by SimplyGeek · · Score: 1

    And when you're on a corporate machine or server where you can't use Dropbox? Keepass is not LastPass. They both have their strengths.

  86. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    So what you are saying is that you use Keepass in a way so that it can act just like LastPass, but it is Dropbox that has access instead of LastPass?

    There is no benefit of Keepass stored on Dropbox over LastPass. They work entirely the same. In LastPass, the password database is encrypted with the access password, and LastPass has no access to your password database.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  87. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

    I use Mozy to back it up, and BTSync to sync it with my phone.

  88. Re:I believe I have a pile of I-told-you-sos to se by nmpg · · Score: 1

    As I said specifically said "I'm not claiming this is better". Just replying to OP wrt to existing alternatives.
    Brute force? I would argue that by the time they broke it became irrelevant.

  89. Re:Passwords are for luddites. by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    So ignore the PR drones and keep using the words as you used to, don't let the drones destroy a perfectly good word.

  90. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    "What can a person do with my bank account anyway? Nothing, that can't be traced and/or reversed."

    Then you should feel perfectly safe posting your bank credentials on this site.

    Not really, he didn't say that nothing will happen, just that a small amount of work will be needed to fix it.
    That doesn't mean he wants to do that work for no reason.

  91. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    do they have the ability to look your passwords?

    No, they do not. So if you ever forget your master password, you lose all your Lastpass-managed passwords forever (happened to my husband..). Everything is encrypted by your master password before it gets to Lastpass.

    The only thing they have access to is your password hint, settable by you, which could be anything (and I usually set my password hint to have no relation to the master password).

  92. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by KGIII · · Score: 1

    I mentioned that. When you hit a second account (easily gathered with my unique username here) then you *may* run into one of the other combinations. So no, not totally secure once one is gone.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  93. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    As soon as I change my master password as prompted by the LastPass email, they have nothing.

    As far as I can tell - "not so fast". You also have to tell LastPass to not allow you to automagically revert to your previous master password. That's hidden under 'Advanced Settings'.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  94. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by Tolkienite · · Score: 1

    I used to do this, except that if one of those sites ever leaks the passwords plaintext, you re screwed everywhere, since it'll be trivial to add 'ReallyHardPassword' as a prefix for the site. Ditto if you cleverly change google->G0o9Le.
    As for 'salting', most* people use some variation of uppercase first letter, uppercase last and/or leding/ending "1" as their password. (Clever ones use 0 instead of 1) so if your password is "1ReallyHardPasswordGoogle!1" well, congratultions, you can now open my luggage ;)
    As many people point out, you really should have unique passwords for every site. For the really paranoid, you could use your password manager's password as salt, provided you trust their rnd genertor (spoiler: you must). It's trivial to just -manually- add the site name to the password form, so if you want to log in as me to slashdot, you'd use "aeCxXAk&+5a_s1&&Slashdot"

  95. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

    I _already_ do. I remember one passphrase that I use to access my local password manager.

    Click on the site I'm trying to login into, Ctrl-C, Alt-Tab, Ctrl-V. Done.

    Why the hell would I waste my time trying to remember 100+ passwords when one will do the job??

  96. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

    You also said it was a "small risk" when it's actually a massive risk. Get Gmail password, look for signups to other sites (invariably will contain username), notice Gmail password is XYZ123gmail, WOLOG say there was a Slashdot signup, go to slashdot.org and attempt login with username listed in Slashdot email + XYZ123slashdot, repeat for any other email with "registration" in the subject.

  97. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by rthille · · Score: 1

    I do this, and I need one of two Yubikey Neo's to decrypt.

    --
    Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
  98. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by rthille · · Score: 1

    Woosh!

    --
    Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
  99. Re:I believe I have a pile of I-told-you-sos to se by Rich0 · · Score: 1

    Lastpass is extremely convenient and I don't know of many practical alternatives that are any more secure against the same threat models.

    Keepass with sync to a Google account. Gives you everything Lastpass Premium does for free, and it's more secure to boot. 2FA is free with Google accounts (no need to buy additional hardware), sync to mobile devices is free, and by not running in the browser and allowing you to use an optional keyfile as well as a master password it's more secure.

    Well, it is missing support for ChromeOS (which also requires running in the browser). :)

    And I don't really see it as any more secure. Somebody can hack into Lastpass, and somebody can hack into Google. Both are likely fairly robust with their security. Apparently Lastpass is fairly up-front about intrusions.

    And nothing prevents you from using a keyfile with lastpass. Just copy/paste it into the password prompt right after typing in your memorized portion of the password. :)

    I'd say that keepass is at best equivalent to lastpass if you're able to access the passwords from multiple systems, and if you don't implement it well you could be worse off.

  100. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by KGIII · · Score: 1

    Nah, those all go to a spam email and that stuff is automatically deleted. It is a throw away account at one of the spam email services. Those will use a different password format. Still not totally secure.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  101. Re:My Brain by dsmatthews9379 · · Score: 1

    And it is starting to happen... http://www.kurzweilai.net/brai...

  102. Re:I believe I have a pile of I-told-you-sos to se by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 1

    Most of my computer friends write down the passwords but alter them in some pattern that works in their head. So ShittyIceCream8456 is ChapmansIceCream5684

  103. Re:Who the fuck would use something like that? by mars-nl · · Score: 1

    I'm interested in that Yubikey Neo solution too...