Slashdot Mirror


Facebook Says it Has Discovered 'Security Issue' Affecting Nearly 50 Million Accounts, Investigation in Early Stages (fb.com)

Facebook shared the following security announcement Friday: On the afternoon of Tuesday, September 25, our engineering team discovered a security issue affecting almost 50 million accounts. We're taking this incredibly seriously and wanted to let everyone know what's happened and the immediate action we've taken to protect people's security. Our investigation is still in its early stages. But it's clear that attackers exploited a vulnerability in Facebook's code that impacted "View As", a feature that lets people see what their own profile looks like to someone else. This allowed them to steal Facebook access tokens which they could then use to take over people's accounts. Access tokens are the equivalent of digital keys that keep people logged in to Facebook so they don't need to re-enter their password every time they use the app. Here is the action we have already taken.

First, we've fixed the vulnerability and informed law enforcement. Second, we have reset the access tokens of the almost 50 million accounts we know were affected to protect their security. We're also taking the precautionary step of resetting access tokens for another 40 million accounts that have been subject to a "View As" look-up in the last year. As a result, around 90 million people will now have to log back in to Facebook, or any of their apps that use Facebook Login. After they have logged back in, people will get a notification at the top of their News Feed explaining what happened. Third, we're temporarily turning off the "View As" feature while we conduct a thorough security review.
The company added it has yet to determine whether these impacted accounts were misused or any information was accessed. Senator Mark Warner has issued a stern reprimand to Facebook over the security incident revelation today. "This is another sobering indicator that Congress needs to step up and take action to protect the privacy and security of social media users. As I've said before -- the era of the Wild West in social media is over," he wrote.

72 comments

  1. Backdoor or Bug? by forkfail · · Score: 1

    Click like for bug, heart for backdoor!

    --
    Check your premises.
    1. Re:Backdoor or Bug? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Bug. Definitely.

      FB can't have people steal private information from their users. It's pretty much like stealing their source of income.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Backdoor or Bug? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut the fuck up Zuck's wife.

    3. Re:Backdoor or Bug? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Bug. Definitely.

      FB can't have people steal private information from their users. It's pretty much like stealing their source of income.

      Bug, because EULA. The security-related part would only be a side door.

      If you don't heart them backdooring you, don't give them the key to your side door. If you want a reach-around, you'll have to go searching in your friend list; don't expect it from Zuck.

  2. You’re the product, fucktards! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're taking this incredibly seriously

    True, got to keep up appearances so that their sheeple products don’t leave the site.

    1. Re:You’re the product, fucktards! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I believe them. If everyone could get any info they want for free, why bother paying FB for it?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:You’re the product, fucktards! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because Fuckerberg will let you cuck him and bang his wife.

  3. Smelled this coming a mile away by RayMarron · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And that's why the only thing you use Facebook authentication for is Facebook.

    --
    ON DELETE CASCADE
    1. Re:Smelled this coming a mile away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think at this point, Facebook should run their apology ads every quarter in anticipation of yet another security incident.

    2. Re:Smelled this coming a mile away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so? what of it?

    3. Re:Smelled this coming a mile away by sexconker · · Score: 1

      That's not how cuckolds work.

      Cucks don't get to fuck. Cucks also don't get fucked, least of all in any way that would make them moan.
      Your traditional cuck doesn't even get to watch, and typically doesn't even know when they're getting cucked.
      Any fucking a true cuck gets is a distraction / charity fucking. The cuck is oblivious to their partner having someone else they have real sex or breed with.

      Your modern cuck fetishists know they're getting cucked and enjoy watching. They still don't get to participate.
      Someone watching while participating by themselves is not a cuck fetishist, but a voyeur.

    4. Re:Smelled this coming a mile away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remind me of South Park episode Coon and Friend Trilogy where BP CEO has to apologize for the result of his horrendous decision.

    5. Re:Smelled this coming a mile away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your modern cuck fetishists know they're getting cucked and enjoy watching. They still don't get to participate.

      LOL ... you seem quite well informed on the topic.

      Now, can you explain why the fuck the alt-right are so fucking obsessed with cuckolds?

      Because I have no idea unless they're all secretly jealous or projecting their own weakness.

    6. Re: Smelled this coming a mile away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're sorry. *while laying naked on a bear rug*

    7. Re:Smelled this coming a mile away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the same reason that racists are the ones who watch the most interracial porn. It's their own fetish they project onto others.

    8. Re:Smelled this coming a mile away by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      You need to upgrade your birding knowledge.

      If you never got fucked, you can't be a cuckold. The whole point is that you already have a nest, with some eggs in it.

      And a different bird (the cuckoo) comes and lays its egg in your nest when you're not looking. Everybody got fucked the same number of times. (once) Birds that didn't get fucked didn't stay to take care of a nest, and didn't get cuckolded.

      Same with humans. You can't normally cuckold somebody who isn't getting any. The cuckoo is always second fiddle. It is important that the cuckold is getting fucked too, so that they'll stay in the nest and take care of the brood.

      Broods parasites who attempt to parasitize individuals without a brood are unlikely to be very successful. The same is true for fetishists; you can't effectively role-play a cuck if you're not already fucking somebody. It is a 2+1 game.

    9. Re:Smelled this coming a mile away by sexconker · · Score: 1

      You need to upgrade your birding knowledge.

      If you never got fucked, you can't be a cuckold. The whole point is that you already have a nest, with some eggs in it.

      And a different bird (the cuckoo) comes and lays its egg in your nest when you're not looking. Everybody got fucked the same number of times. (once) Birds that didn't get fucked didn't stay to take care of a nest, and didn't get cuckolded.

      Same with humans. You can't normally cuckold somebody who isn't getting any. The cuckoo is always second fiddle. It is important that the cuckold is getting fucked too, so that they'll stay in the nest and take care of the brood.

      Broods parasites who attempt to parasitize individuals without a brood are unlikely to be very successful. The same is true for fetishists; you can't effectively role-play a cuck if you're not already fucking somebody. It is a 2+1 game.

      You're not very well informed on human cucks and how they operate.
      Are you perhaps a soy boy beta cuck?

  4. And they're telling users how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Strange that one doesn't actually see the alert on FB itself....

    1. Re:And they're telling users how? by Desler · · Score: 2

      They’re taking it seriously!! How dare you question the Zuck’s sincerity.

    2. Re:And they're telling users how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not just seriously. Incredibly seriously. That seriously serious!

      Kind of makes one want to go back and follow up on issues FB pledged to merely take seriously.

      But then again, who takes FB seriously?

    3. Re:And they're telling users how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Strange that one doesn't actually see the alert on FB itself....

      After extensive study of their userbase, Facebook has determined that no one worth informing of a security breach trusts any posts put into their feed by Facebook. Many even use blockers to remove all Facebook sponsored intrusions into their timelines. Therefore, Facebook has determined that the best way to inform people of a password issue at Facebook is to post it on G+ and let those 6 users start chains of outrage that will spread across all of Facebook.

    4. Re:And they're telling users how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But then again, who takes FB seriously?"

      Seriously too many people do. Likes and hearts mean more than real life to many many people.

    5. Re:And they're telling users how? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Meh. If they want people to believe it they should put it on the Usenets.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  5. That's not what "Have to" means... by mujadaddy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As a result, around 90 million people will now have to log back in to Facebook

    Or, y'know, they could not do that.

    --
    Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
    "Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
    1. Re:That's not what "Have to" means... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I logged into Facebook today after the breach story. But I use a Yubikey to access my account, and I have my account permissions locked down pretty tight. So I wasn't very worried.

      I can't post anything to my Facebook feed. I know Facebook locked down the View As feature and a few other things. But I think they also (accidentally) locked out users who have very narrow permissions about who can see their stuff and post on their wall.

      Every time I try to post something on Facebook to my own feed I get a message like "This user does not allow sharing with them." Something like that.

      I wonder if it's because I don't let people tag me? Or is it because I only let friends in a small permission group to post stuff on my wall? Either way, I guess I'm not posting stuff on Facebook for a while.

    2. Re:That's not what "Have to" means... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh cool. It's well known that Yubikey has been severely compromised in the underground.

      but don't you worry! you keep using (and trusting) whatever shit software you store your passwords in :)

  6. Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is this discovery is related to the cancelation of the live deletion of Zuck's account? Talk about just in time.

    Captcha: astute

  7. was this the zuck hacker streamer's way in? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    his announcement...

    then subsequent cancellation...

    followed very soon after by this disclosure.

    did he get paid to keep to shut it down? or only a pinky swear not to prosecute so long as he never so much as pings facebook servers ever again?

  8. Security Issue internally codenamed: "Users" by DalM · · Score: 2

    Facebook is investigating how to patch the security vulnerability code named internally as "Users".

    1. Re:Security Issue internally codenamed: "Users" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dallas May? Moar liek Dallas Gay amirite?!!

    2. Re:Security Issue internally codenamed: "Users" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go home Zuck, you're drunk.

    3. Re:Security Issue internally codenamed: "Users" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go home Tim, you're queer as fuck.

    4. Re:Security Issue internally codenamed: "Users" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For you, the month of May is the month of Gay instead?

  9. the famous break things mantra comes back to bite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We used to have this famous mantra ... and the idea here is that as developers, moving quickly is so important that we were even willing to tolerate a few bugs in order to do it," Zuckerberg said. "What we realized over time is that it wasn't helping us to move faster because we had to slow down to fix these bugs and it wasn't improving our speed."

    That was 2014. I'm guessing the codebase is now pretty monolithic. The "Move Fast, Break things" ethic isn't something you pull out of quickly.

  10. backdoor or... by Tsolias · · Score: 1

    a different way of selling data and disguising it as ((((theft))))?

    1. Re:backdoor or... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Why disguise it? They pretty much got greenlit by congress to steal any information they want and sell it to the highest bidder, what could they possibly gain that way?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:backdoor or... by Tsolias · · Score: 1

      idk, selling EU citizen data without getting fined by the EU?

    3. Re:backdoor or... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good luck with that. Facebook has more legal weight than the EU, and can leave the EU strung along for decades, even with the GDPR. European politicians know that too much interference, their opponent will get mysterious sacks of cash for their campaign from anonymous contributors, come the next election cycle.

    4. Re:backdoor or... by Tsolias · · Score: 1

      EU has fined Intel when Intel was Bigger, Greater and Mightier. Don't believe that FB or MS or even Alphabet are big enough for EU to fear them.
      The EU corruption can make them disappear if they could substitute them with an EU based service.
      FB recently started paying their taxes in Ireland, in fear of getting fined even more.
      FB took a great hit with the "incident" in the UK for a mere 3million users....

    5. Re:backdoor or... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Actually, in the EU bribing politicians is illegal. You should try it, it actually works.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  11. informed law enforcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We suck so badly at security that we deserve to be put in jail. We're waiting for you to pick us up.

  12. "Law" Enforcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, law enforcement? Police must now be facebook's bitch. Repeat: Do not use this shitbook.

    1. Re:"Law" Enforcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My 1st reaction... why call the cops? Legally cover yer ass, I guess.
      2nd thought .... is this a GDPR violation? Probably.
      3rd ....How many fb users are in GDPR-friendly countries? Hmm... about 90 million.
      Lastly .... What's 4% of $25 billion in quarterly revenue?

      Just wishfully thinking.

    2. Re:"Law" Enforcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-faces-potential-1-63-billion-fine-in-europe-over-data-breach-1538330906

      I told ya so.

  13. Can someone delete the whole thing? by four20_BlzItFgt · · Score: 0

    Someone should rm-rf / their whole system. You know for the lols

  14. Damn by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

    I so wanted to watch that happen and then storm troopers immediately break down the door.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    1. Re:Damn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like droned strikes. Collateral damage you say??! Yeah, fuck the babies that die. MUST PROTECT THE GLOBALIST ELITE such as the Zuck!

  15. They discovered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    www.facebook.com

  16. Well now I feel shitty. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't have to log back in to Facebook... I guess no one has viewed their profile as me. I guess I don't matter to anyone.

    1. Re:Well now I feel shitty. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many of your friends are going to get a notification?

  17. Limit the anonymity or it's the DEATH of truth by shanen · · Score: 2

    Big Subject, eh? Can I justify it?

    Yeah, but I had to think for a second. The real value of this breach is that the hackers have some non-anonymous identities to abuse. If they were professional hackers, perhaps working for Russia or NK, then part of the motivation was limitations in what they can already do with fake identities (AKA sock puppets). Essentially it's a value proposition, where a real identity is much more valuable than a fake identity. It would be interesting to ask the hackers how much more valuable.

    My initial reaction is that we need more data, especially about the timing. Facebook's response suggests that this attack may have begun months ago. If so, and if the hackers actually had millions of identities to play with, then we know they have been extremely careful in what they are doing with them. If they had engaged in any wholesale abuse, then Facebook would have been deluged with reports of suspicious activities.

    Okay. Only more deluged than usual, but I still think it would have shown up more quickly.

    But identity abuse is built on the foundation of fake identities of the anonymous stripe. I'm still advocating MEPR as the approach that could do the most to save Facebook from itself. It could even work on Slashdot, but there's no chance Slashdot could gather the resources to implement it. ADSAuPR, atAJG.

    One more wrinkle from the vast world of Facebook abuse: Have the Facebook (and Twitter?) trolls started pre-blocking the people (like me) who advocate blocking trolls rather than playing with them? A block-first strategy? To evade detection or confuse the issue? It seems likely that Facebook notices accounts that get blocked too much, so perhaps the trolls have started a new rigging of the system, possibly even sharing lists of identities for mass blocking by sock puppets.

    If my final speculation is approximately correct, then one of the most important forms of data the hackers could have obtained from the reported account breaches would have been the lists of blocked users. This is the kind of data that they could use quite surreptitiously to figure out (1) Who is blocking them and (2) How the blocking patterns are related to sock puppet attrition, the better to protect their hordes.

    --
    Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
    1. Re:Limit the anonymity or it's the DEATH of truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You put far too much thought into it.....fakebook needs more people to login so they can lie to their investors about how many "real" accounts are in use...."well just last month 50 million people logged in" omitting to add "to change their passwords after we were breached"

  18. It makes perfect sense by Random+Internet+Guy · · Score: 1

    But it's clear that attackers exploited a vulnerability in Facebook's code that impacted "View As", a feature that lets people see what their own profile looks like to someone else.

    If you can pretend to be someone else, someone else should be able to pretend to be you!

    1. Re:It makes perfect sense by mujadaddy · · Score: 1

      Right? What a dumpster fire.

      --
      Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
      "Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
  19. Found the cuck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject.

  20. Security issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook has several 'security issues', known as 'employees'.

  21. Time to dump Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously a trend of missteps for Facebook. Or is it that other then lip service Facebook is only interested in how it can make more money off users information? At least for me I don’t include much personal information in my profile anymore and it’s locked down as best as it can be. But again maybe it’s just time to dump Facebook.

  22. Sure. I will be logging back in... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And deleting my account. Thanks for the heads up.

  23. They found it! by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1
    Zuck and his crew This is weaponized malware that presents itself as a way to access people's private data.

    The malware is named Facebook.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  24. not suprised, have you seen their code ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go view the source (luke) , on the client side its > half a million lines of javascript, just the activity pings alone measure in the MB, for a fucking newsfeed ?

    shit code, written by shit programmers who haven't a fucking clue about programming for the web, they should be ashamed of their shite frameworks and every week it gets bigger as 20,000 programmers try to justify their existence.
    shit laden on shit, its a wonder it works at all.

    AC.

    1. Re:not suprised, have you seen their code ? by devslash0 · · Score: 1

      The output you see in the browser has nothing to do with what programmers write. It may be the nicest piece of code you've ever written but once you put it through your build process of compilers, transpilers, pre and post-processing, auto-optimisations, localisation, stripping, trimming, polyfill integration, minification and {deity_of_choice} knows what else, the code becomes incomprehensible to the human brain.

      Your expectations can be compared to having someone write C code and then making sense of its post-compilation assembly language representation. Sure, you can look at it and identify individual instructions and basic structures, but good luck trying to make any sense of it.

  25. Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's plenty of brain-dead people who have to come to me whenever Facebook decides to not log them in automatically, so if they now have to re-enter their password, I suspect a bunch of phonecalls soon.

    If people can't even do that, they shouldn't be allowed on Facebook, much less the web itself.

  26. Delete your account by Ryanrule · · Score: 1

    Not just the app. Be. A. Man.

  27. Small change - yet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ao, how long before that number triples or quadruples?

  28. Anyone shocked? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously not shocked. Also, I haven't read enough about it yet to know if there should have been a test case for this in their test process.

    It is not possible to cover everything all the time. So I'll reserve judgement.

  29. Naw... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook is the security issue!

  30. HA HA! by MerlTurkin · · Score: 1

    Keep using facebook you idiots! Some people never learn.

  31. Move Fast and Break Things by dmpot · · Score: 1

    When the “View As” feature was developed, the motto was "Move Fast and Break Things." Should we be surprised that this feature is broken?

    Clearly, moving fast is very important for any company that wants to be successful, but if you prioritize speed over security, it is going to catch with you later. Security bugs are different from regular software bugs in that you may never find out about them until serious damage is already done. Therefore the idea "let's move fast and fix a few bugs later" never works well when it comes to security.