Everyone is talking about the poor security practices, which is fair. Or they are talking about the appropriateness of such an app existing, which is also fair.
But the immediate take away should be, especially in today’s political environment, that we cannot and should not trust sensitive data that leaves our device, particularly if you are of any kind of non privileged group.
the entire UK government disliked this comment
The UK government can shove it up their fucking arse.
Sincerely, A UK citizen.
This has been the case for a long time, so suddenly you have apps like Tea that encourage you to upload info of other people. So now even the few that take care not to upload their info can be nicely monitored. And the Gestapo does not even need to pay their informants for it.
This sounds like victim-blaming. This website didn’t even secure their database with a password. Come on. I’m sure their privacy policy gave the standard promises about storing their private data in a secure way, which they did not do.
Encouraging people to be safe and care about their privacy on the internet is not victim blaming.
I’m sure their privacy policy gave the standard promises about storing their private data in a secure way, which _they did not do. _
This is what people want to warn others of. The developers of Tea are hardly the only offenders. Definitely not an example of victim blaming.
In the current environment, at-risk people (women, immigrants, etc) who might have “at-risk” activities (abortion, immigration, etc) don’t have the luxury of relying on a privacy policy. I am not blaming them, I am simply stating how it must be if they are to avoid adverse actions.
This particular instance involved poorly secured data; what happens when warrantless demands are made by the government?
The Tea debacle proves that sensitive data cannot be trusted once out of your hands.
I agree. The reality is that nobody should be trusting these platforms with such sensitive data. As demonstrated, there is so much that can go wrong when you trust these companies. This is a LOT of risk for very little reward.
Whatever you put online you should think “what if this were made public and attributed to me” before you post it.
And also men are vicious trash goblins.
You’re not adding much to the “this app is appropriate” argument.
Well the point of the app was to identify the small percentage of men who do most raoe Nd stuff, and even if the law wouldnt stop them, help potential victims avoid them, so as to not have to be guarded around every man one meets like hes a potential vicious rape monster, because some just are.
Im saying all men are garbage, and the fundamental oremise that you can under any conditions act like any number of men are human is foolish and likely to get you hurt. Which i think this situation show.
The company should be sued into the ground. This is horrendous
I mean, it’s on brand. The doxxing app is successfully doxxing people…
In any other engineering discipline this would he negligence.
At least some of the negligence is on Google, for the atrocious default security settings in Firebase
The vulnerability is called hospital gown because they leave the back end wide open by design. It’s not even a traditional vulnerability, since it’s technically working as intended
It is negligence, but information workers have very little regulation when it comes to handling personal data (outside of specific fields, like healthcare and finance).
I say this as an information worker who handles a lot of personal data. Worst case scenario, I get fired and can’t use them as a reference. Unless I’m intentionally stealing data and using it for crimes there’s no risk of criminal penalties.
We needed privacy laws 20 years ago but the tech bros assured everyone that it would be fine and for a long time they were mostly responsible with our data. But now we’re well into the enshittification of the Internet and the lack of regulation is allowing these kinds of harms to become common.
Though, in a sane regulatory framework Tea wouldn’t be allowed to exist in the first place. The entire point of the site is to doxx people and share personal details about them without their consent.
You get 89 cents in the settlement. Do you prefer to get a direct deposit or a check?
Both the company, for failing to protect its users; and a large majority of its users, for doxxing and libel.
Its unfortunate that it happened this way, but now the people who are being libeled against and doxxed have the ability to find out about it where they didn’t before.
I’m not going to hold it against women for having a private group to tell on predatory dudes when this existed and nobody ever faced any consequences. What We Learned About the 70K-Person Telegram Channel on How to Rape Women
Arguing that tea was for “telling on predatory dudes” is like saying backdooring encryption is to catch people spreading CP.
That’s what the creator of the site said it was for.
Would you believe me if I told you some systems are used for other things than what’s intended?
Sure, if you have evidence. What do you think it was really being used for? And what’s your evidence?
No need for evidence. The idea of anyone being able to claim anything about a person without proof is inherently flawed. Are you saying that the app has some magical feature which forces everyone to tell the truth? No disgruntled ex can make up things about their previous partner? I would love to see you prove that.
It sucks for those people, but everyone should expect anything they say online to be possibly tied back to them. Secrets and identification information don’t mix. Especially online. The good news is that there is no evidence any of it is real, anyone can lie on the site saying whatever they want, so if doxed someone can just say they were bored and wanted to fit in and see what others were discussing or such. Hopefully for them it doesn’t turn into people getting hurt for talking behind someone’s back like it often does offline.
fuck off with that complacency
there’s so much underlying rules for private communication between computer systems, this type of thing is pure neglect boardering on international.
there’s no reason to think everything online should be open and available. we should all be allowed to be in private spaces, especially if it’s advertised as a private space
People complaining here that security was to lax, people complaining in the next thread that the libre dev is the victim because security was to high.
Is it possible to get both balanced, yes. But it will never make everyone happy.
This is why you don’t vibe code a webservice
This wasn’t vibe coding, it’s incompetant devops.
You have to go out of your way to make these buckets public like this. Several giant “Everyone will have access to this” warnings, re-authentication, a permanent warning symbol on the dashboard AND regular e-mails reminding you that you have a public bucket. I don’t even think you can do this via the API, it requires a human to manually make this setting.
I’m guessing that they couldn’t figure out how to configure the Access Control Lists and just made it public so that it would work. That’s fine in a test environment, without any user data but it’s pure incompetence to have a production system setup this way.
I’d say it’s not fine in a test environment, because then your test env S3 bucket is publicly available.
It’s not great, but it’s an acceptable kludge if you’re the one holding everyone back and you can’t figure out the problem immediately. Set it to public, let the devs get to work and research the problem until you find a real solution.
The test environment data should be generic so if someone were to discover the bucket they’ll get some pictures of cats and a bunch of people who live at 12345 anywhere street.
It’s a bad idea to leave your S3 perms wide open, because then anyone can use your S3 bucket for whatever reason they want, and it’ll hit your wallet. And if they can’t figure out basic IAM and ACLs, I’m also betting they can’t figure out “requester pays”
What? No, this is a horrible practice.
If you can’t figure out how to set identity-based ACLs you shouldn’t be working in technology! Oh I’ll just set this shit to any/any and figure out later. FUCK ANYONE WHO DOES THIS IN THEIR LEFT EAR.
If in were in the security team of that company, I would never accept ACLs on the bucket as a sufficient compensating control for this risk. Here the best most reasonable would be encryption, which would make the bucket being public relatively unimportant.
When you are collecting so sensitive data (potentially including personal data of people not using your service), you simply can’t even imagine doing that by storing the data unencrypted.
They hired an investigator? Any investigator worth a shit is gonna say that they’re liable for failing to secure private data they collected,
as well as for retaining data they were apparently legally obligated to deleteEdit: Misread that segment, they actually presented it as if they were deleted to users, but apparently retained them to comply with vague “law enforcement requirements.”
Was this app made by misogynists? Did they “accidentally” fuck up on purpose?
that’s my theory. how can you be so grossly negligent to expose all your data with no ACLs. especially when collecting personal identification
No, the direct opposite
Doesn’t matter what side you’re on, when you’re extremist, you’re extremist
Yeah, first time is an accident. Second time, though…?
I do try not to attribute to malice anything that can be adequately explained by stupidity. At the end of the day, I don’t think it really matters. This level of stupidity is gross negligence, and they need to get sued through the floor.
On the one hand, sucks that a leak like this even happens anymore, no one deserves to be doxxed like that. On the other hand, I struggle to feel bad for the users of the doxxing app getting doxxed in return…
At least they’re honest, they did spill tea.
A whole lot of tea.
Did they use Tea app to spill tea about the shitty security practices of Tea app? Do they spill tea there about the app’s founder, Sean Cook, and frivolous claims of a safe space that preserves anonymity?
“Sir, we’ve already been breached once!”
“But what about second breach?”
its like the ashley madison drama, which exposed cheating.
I was today years old when I learned that Ashley Madison is still in operation
Don’t want your information on the internet? don’t upload it to anyone on or over the internet, it really is a fucking simple concept.
Fucking simple concept which major businesses are economically compelled to gaslight you out of.
So the problem is in economics.
Each such business provides all of their infrastructure, expensive, good and well-maintained (Google has its own Internet cables), which is not separated from their application services.
So one provider of infrastructure (in the wide sense, solving all the problems) usually serves many users of their own application and many application providers (I’m inventing terms) without their own infrastructure.
While user of an application generally can’t switch infrastructure providers as they want. It’s kinda technically fine and normal (there are NTP server pools, one could in the olden days search many FTP servers for the needed file, and so on), but doesn’t happen IRL. Because there’s no standard way for pooling resources and tracking them, and there’s no applications using it.
So - the data model (cryptographic global person identities, globally identified by some derived hash posts (a post is, say, datetime, author, some tags, content, hash of it all, signatures, I dunno) (creation of a group or a vote or a changing of privileges or moderation can be a post too), for forming a representation for the user a group is “replayed” in the right order to know which user had a privilege to, say, moderate posts etc ; one can also generate group snapshots from time to time when replaying thus, by the group owner identity, to make it faster) is orthogonal to the service model. That’s important so that it were fit for alternative service models, like sneakernet or offline-enabled mesh or anything delay-tolerant. Or at least a p2p kademlia DHT-based service model.
The service model - the core of it all is a tracker service. It works like a tracker in BitTorrent (or maybe Hotline, but that’s old), except with signed announces, and it tracks search and storage and relay and maybe even computation services (which announce themselves to it). A search service gets storage services from trackers and indexes their contents (one can even announce objects to a search service similarly to trackers, might be better) to search by tags. A storage service just stores objects and yields them. A relay service must be harder, you the user must somehow announce (to trackers too?) which relay service you are registered on at this moment, a bit like SIP or like SMTP (only very temporary), so that messages to that relay service would reach you.
The client would just request a bunch of trackers for all things they need - to search for stuff for services, then request these services and merge their results. Forming a group representation is “searching for stuff” too, and then getting the objects referenced by index service responses from a bunch of storage services. To notify another user that you’ve sent them a message one can use a relay service.
I think it’s easy to see that it’s kinda primitive other than requiring proper cryptography. And it’s a global system working over the Internet (except no, it doesn’t exist). Similar to NOSTR, but I think better due to separation of data model and service model.
The advantages of this - one still can make any kinds of applications using such common infrastructure, but the resource-based feudalism we have this might hurt. Similar to how BitTorrent keeps working despite quite a few people not liking it.
The disadvantages - well, stuff will get lost, there are paid BT trackers but no paid BT peers, while in such a system paid storage and other services would be a thing (still much better than Facebook).
And live in a cave! 😬
It would be nice if also they secured data too.
don’t upload it to the internet!
or use a smart phone
or corporate searches that track you
or go to any website with ads - they track you
hell don’t even search the internet! your ISP tracks dns requests
or use a modern tv that tracks what is on your screen
or you can do custom phone from - just unlock the bootloader, root it, and install! then just setup pihole/adguard/self-host everything
it’s simple, for privacy just go live in a yurt in the woods to not be tracked 24/7
“Stop attacking us guys we just want to do a little misandry” -Tea app
What do you think is misandrist about this?
It’s an app about doxing people without their consent
To be fair, that alone wouldn’t be misandrist, if it weren’t exclusively for woman perpetrators targeting exclusively men as their victims.
How are you defining “doxing” here?
Its traditional definition works fine for this.
Just because women are doing it doesn’t make it right.
The Tea app is a women-only dating safety platform where members can share reviews about men, with access to the platform only granted after providing a selfie and government ID verification.
This sounds irresistible for angry misogynists. The only thing that surprises me about this is that it didn’t happen earlier.
