That post seems to be missing.
marsara9 45 points 3 years ago path: 0 489900, hotness: undefined, score: 45, children: 1
CylonBunny 22 points 3 years ago

This is why open source is good!

path: 0 489900 490135, hotness: undefined, score: 22, children: 0
randombit 12 points 3 years ago

None of your other accounts will be compromised because you’re using a random password stored in a password manager.

You are using a password manager?

path: 0 489874, hotness: undefined, score: 12, children: 0
puppetx 7 points 3 years ago

There is no way the passwords aren’t hashed, otherwise I’m sure some responsible dev on the project would be making some noise.

path: 0 490392, hotness: undefined, score: 7, children: 1
WeirdGoesPro 11 points 3 years ago

Isn’t there some famous cautionary tale about everyone assuming someone else checked? Regardless, someone else in this thread checked, and passwords are hashed.

path: 0 490392 490540, hotness: undefined, score: 11, children: 0
neanderthal 5 points 3 years ago

big corporations

Big corporations and commercial software are so much different from open source projects that apples and oranges is a massive understatement, more like apples and asteroids.

Commercial projects have more constraints for a plethora of reasons. Open source, not so much. Some examples from a vendor perspective: Large customers and their environments limit (e.g. your biggest customer uses old crappy thing x that limits developers), license restrictions (e.g. using GPL code risks having to release the code and rights to distribute the software you are trying to sell), over promising marketing or sales that creates deadlines that limit quality control, incompetent co-workers, ability of your support staff and SLA requirements, etc. In house development has some of those issues, except they have to deal with crappy thing x that vendor won't or can't update, super important stuff using really old systems that are really hard to replace, like the software controlling a 10 million dollar 20 year old centrifuge used to separate a chemical critical to an industrial process.

Open source doesn't have these constraints, users can just fork the code and keep using the old stuff if their COBOL based financial transaction processing system needs it and update it themselves.

The millions of eyeballs on open source code is exaggerated. Most users of OSS, even those with the skills, don't look at the code of a lot of things they use. Their realistically isn't time. BUT...password storage, authentication, and session code is almost guaranteed to get scrutiny.

Last commercial software can do bad things like plain text passwords because they want to cut corners for the bottom line.

Open source software can still completely suck and make poor decisions as well because anyone can publish some OSS whether or not it is actually good.

path: 0 491217, hotness: undefined, score: 5, children: 0
neanderthal 3 points 3 years ago

Password hashing is great, but if in attacker breaks lemmy or an instance server somehow and can modify lemmy or tinker with the front ending server config they can just steal credentials as they come in, so hashing is good, but IMO gets given more importantance than it should. I'll take my down votes now for downplaying password hashing.

path: 0 491340, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 1
WhyIsItReal 6 points 3 years ago

i mean, if you’re not hashing passwords, there is clearly a major problem there.

if in attacker breaks lemmy

what does this even mean?

are you worried about mitm attacks? that’s a basic feature of HTTPS, and basically the reason it exists

path: 0 491340 491569, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 0

thanks for using Leebra!

go to feed...