While I was asleep, apparently the site was hacked. Luckily, (big) part of the lemmy.world team is in US, and some early birds in EU also helped mitigate this.

As I am told, this was the issue:

  • There is an vulnerability which was exploited
  • Several people had their JWT cookies leaked, including at least one admin
  • Attackers started changing site settings and posting fake announcements etc

Our mitigations:

  • We removed the vulnerability
  • Deleted all comments and private messages that contained the exploit
  • Rotated JWT secret which invalidated all existing cookies

The vulnerability will be fixed by the Lemmy devs.

Details of the vulnerability are here

Many thanks for all that helped, and sorry for any inconvenience caused!

Update While we believe the admins accounts were what they were after, it could be that other users accounts were compromised. Your cookie could have been ‘stolen’ and the hacker could have had access to your account, creating posts and comments under your name, and accessing/changing your settings (which shows your e-mail).

For this, you would have had to be using lemmy.world at that time, and load a page that had the vulnerability in it.

  • ThisIsMyLemmyLogin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    284
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I wish hackers would invest their time in clearing credit card debt, deleting hospital fees, or something else that actually serves the public good, instead of hacking ordinary people just trying to get by.

      • Vamp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        37
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        As I pointed out in the thread it was probably a few Lemmy users themselves that did it.

          • dingus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yeah it seems like the attack wasn’t “malicious” per se in that the attacker didn’t seem to want to completely take down the site. They just seemed to want to mess with everyone by redirecting to lemon party and other mildly shocking things like racist remarks. Reads more like a bored person to me than anything.

        • Xero@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          it doesn’t matter who, it’s the “why”. They get nothing from this, the only one who benefits from Lemmy going down is spez

          • SrElsewhere@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            19
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I’ve sat at keyboards beside people studiously working their own. My presumption was that we were working on the same project. Then they have their AHA moment, and show me how they’ve hacked into our host machine.

            They didn’t do it for money or to cause disruption. They did it to see if they could, and succeeding was reward enough. Then, happy as could be, they set off in pursuit of their next accomplishment.

            Ya never know what’s going through others’ minds or what motivates them.

      • TheStarkGuy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nah. There’s far too much risk for Reddit to be involved. If even one hacker spilled the beans it’d cause a massive panic for Reddit investors.

        • eating3645@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          35
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          “It would be extremely stupid and would inevitably backfire if reddit was responsible. Seriously, if spez has one ounce of foresight he would not be involved.”

          Well you have convinced me reddit is behind it.

          • TheStarkGuy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            There’s a huge difference between alienating people in an effort to make the website profitable, and outright paying hackers to go after Lemmy, which would be a criminal action. Let’s not get all big brain on here and pretend Lemmy.world is a threat to Reddit and is pulling away tons of users, to the point that Spez needs it out of commission. I didn’t jump here from Reddit to promote conspiracies

        • SrElsewhere@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s well established that Rdeadit* doesn’t make foolish moves. /s

          I’m not saying they’re behind this. I think they are not. But I’m not ruling them out because of their acumen.

          During the event a message flashed on my screen, “This website has been seized by Rdeadit for copyright violation”. That suggested two things to me. Rdeadit didn’t write that. Whoever did write it doesn’t understand how a domain would legally be seized.

    • Riskable@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Deleting hospital fees/debt is very dangerous… In many HUGE regions in the US there’s only one hospital and if that hospital suddenly can’t pay its bills it could shut down, leaving a whole lot of completely innocent people in a very sad, people-are-dying sort of state.

      In fact, something like this already happened:

      https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/st-maragrets-health-central-illinois-hospital-closing/

      Hospitals are special in that they’re often evil organizations (not all though) that are some of the easiest to hack but also provide critical services to the most vulnerable. One should tread lightly. Political solutions are better (hack some politicians that are against healthcare reform instead).

      Clearing credit card debt via hacking is nearly impossible but I agree it would be a much more ethical choice for hackers to target. I used to work for the credit card industry. My unique insider perspective, deep industry knowledge, and personal experience is here to let you know they suck. They are just as evil and unethical and unnecessary as everyone thinks they are! Seriously: If Visa, MasterCard, American Express, and all the lesser players suddenly disappeared the world would be a better place.

      Before that can happen though people need a backup payment method that doesn’t go through their systems and no: Cash won’t work (there’s not enough in circulation and it’s dangerous to carry large amounts of it). The credit card companies know this threat exists which is why they lobbied Florida (and probably other states) to outlaw alternative, government-run forms of payment (e.g. central bank currency).

      As soon as people have a widely accepted payment option that doesn’t go through Visa and MasterCard’s middlemen (e.g. First Data) then hackers can take their gloves off! Until then though… Let’s keep the payment infrastructure working, OK? Thanks!

      There’s no limit to the amount of good deeds hackers can do though. So let’s encourage that! For example, there’s plenty of cartels and evil religious organizations (e.g. Taliban, ISIS, Mormon Church, Prosperity Gospel scam artists) that have plenty of money to spare and enormous attack surfaces 👍

      • Ready! Player 31@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hospitals are special in that they’re often evil organizations

        Just want to state the obvious and say, this is pretty much only the case in the US.

      • bev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think the alternative payment systems in the developing countries are actually good. UPI in India is very utilitarian. China also has the wechat thing. I guess the issue with these are that they are not universal and limited to a single country.

    • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      29
      ·
      1 year ago

      clearing credit card debt, deleting hospital fees, or something else that actually serves the public good,

      Inflation does very clearly not serve the public good. That aside, causing havoc in banks and medical institutions would have other unpleasant effects.

      • jarfil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        How about cleaning the bottom 10%'s debt, with the earings from one week of the top 0.1%?

        • DreadTowel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I already know I’m gonna be downvoted for this, but the top 1%/0.1% spending isn’t gonna change, whereas the bottom 10% will cause inflation… That’s why there’s no magic bullet.

          • jarfil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The bottom 10% don’t have enough money to “cause” inflation, not even the bottom 90% have that much money. Inflation is driven by the top 5-10%, representing 70% of the wealth; the rest just get taken for the ride.

            You’re right the top 1%'s spending won’t change, it’s already 1000x above a person’s basic needs, so what’s the difference between 1000x and 900x (10% inflation).

            • DreadTowel@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Exactly, the bottom 10% don’t have enough money, meaning that any money you give them will go towards consumption. The top bracket’s spending as % of income or wealth is tiny and is mostly independent of their income. Their money is spent on investments, not basic goods and services. They practically don’t affect inflation.

              I think money should be printed during periods of low inflation. E.g. Japan could have benefited from that. After this bout is over, governments can return to printing, carefully.

        • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          20
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ah, you mean unauthorized “redistribution”, not unauthorized “vanishing debt”.

          Technically should do less harm in terms of inflation, but money lying around is different from money being used, so there’ll still be an increase in inflation.

          The part about causing havoc - kinda same, there may not be direct inconsistencies as in the initial variant, but there’ll still be some confusion due to the “top 0.1%” possibly being petty and trying to get their money back.

          I frankly prefer changing the rules so that there’d be fewer artificial barriers for competition and economic efficiency to this. Say, patent law and trademark laws and IP laws have basically outgrown their usefulness and are now just a plague. Same with various licenses and practices for medical/pharmaceutical stuff (I know that things should be tested and an average person can’t tell a hoax from a normal thing, just entities doing certification shouldn’t be able to block stuff which would then be used to create oligopolies). Same with telecom. And so on.

          Except for air traffic, water traffic, road traffic and radio, of course. Not regulating those would mean, eh, real havoc.

          • sab@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You’re ruining the circlejerk with your realism! 😠

            Edit: I think Mr. Robot gave a good glimpse what would happen if all debts were wiped. It sounds fun on paper, but in the end, the people with the least money would suffer the most.

            • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I personally just lose any interest in conversation when I realize that my counterpart doesn’t want a working system or a better world or really some justice, they simply want to rob someone who has more than they do. No deeper purpose or something, just plain envy.

              It’s like certain moments in sex. So bloody frustrating.

              And, of course, the only leftists I’ve encountered who wouldn’t be what I describe were book characters. Yeah, nice characters, fascinating, really making me wish something like this was possible, but even with the depth limitations for describing an entire person on paper they were still deeper that RL leftists, FFS!!!

              I have at least met living sincere good-willing ancaps and living sincere good-willing fascists (sic) even. The only people I know in person I could possibly call a real sincere good-willing leftist would be my sister, and maybe one of my cousins, and one DM (though from a few conversations I suspect he just has, eh, a leftist background, but is more literate in economics than such people usually are).

            • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Well, I honestly in a way write such comments in a tone more likely to irritate people. Maybe not consciously. I just happen to have grown in a family and in groups where disagreeing and arguing was not considered disrespectful, and I am ironically not very tolerant to the other way of looking at this.

              (Should think about this more often when I want to complain about life - some people were not that lucky.)

              • DreadTowel@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Seems that a chunk of this platform’s userbase are people generally angry at the establishment who upvote everything that wants to bring it down and downvote everything that rejects the idea. Happy that there’s many reasonable people here too :)

                • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’m generally angry at the establishment too, it’s just that I see that establishment being pretty friendly to leftist ideas on economics in everything but direct admission of it.

                  • DreadTowel@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Well, you can disagree without being angry. I in general think that anger is a liability, not an asset. It hinders debate and argumentation.

          • jarfil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            you mean unauthorized “redistribution”

            Fine, let’s do taxes: how about cleaning the bottom 90%'s debt, with the income from 4 months of the top 0.1%.

            …and that’s just 30% income tax, it used to be 90% for the rich right after WWII: History of taxation in the United States

            • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              It’s not that simple, there’s a response of the “top 0.1%” moving their property elsewhere or distributing it by various legal means so that they’d have to pay less.

              In dumb terms, you have to design a system where 4 people collectively owning 4bln$ would pay the same as 1 person owning 4bln$. Not even mentioning that they can have N friends abroad.

              Also there are still “rich” people in Scandinavian countries, who may not directly own nearly as much as Bill Gates, but still have enormous power.

              Also this will, in fact, affect inflation.

              My point is - money represents power, which is convertible into other means, you can tax money or property, but you can’t universally tax power.

              Money-wise (as a universal equivalent in a non-coercive system) you can at least somewhat clearly evaluate that power. If you scare powerful people off to convert their power into more obscure media, you won’t have that clarity.

              So I don’t see this as a problem one can solve, but I see other problems more accessible, like patent\IP\trademark\certification laws.

        • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Having a dedicated sub for bad understanding of economics seems stupid, it’s already spread over all subs, it’s normal.

          Of course, the extremes of bad economics would be usually found someplace with “soc” in the name.

          • utopianfiat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m saying your statement is bad economics. Debts get discharged all the time and they have no impact on inflation. It’s called the Bankruptcy System and it’s been a part of American economic reality since the mid-1800s.

            • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Debts get discharged all the time

              Yes, so?

              and they have no impact on inflation

              Measured by whom? Logically they should.

              It’s called the Bankruptcy System and it’s been a part of American economic reality since the mid-1800s.

              So in your idea of good economics it doesn’t matter for inflation if debt of NxM total gets discharged per month or of NxK total per month where K is much bigger than M?

              I just don’t get that pretentious acting.

              • utopianfiat@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Logically they should.

                No, they shouldn’t. The money supply is unaffected by discharges.

                So in your idea of good economics it doesn’t matter for inflation if debt of NxM total gets discharged per month or of NxK total per month where K is much bigger than M?

                Discharge does introduce short-term shocks but it’s not the doomsday scenario you’re painting it to be. We did it in the 1800s and it was mostly fine compared to the regular bank panics before the greenback was adopted.

                • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The money supply is unaffected by discharges.

                  Ah, OK. Maybe “inflation” is the wrong word, but there’s a response. Insurance becomes more expensive, loans become more expensive, basically everybody for whom such an event is a risk reacts to its probability growing.

                  but it’s not the doomsday scenario you’re painting it to be

                  Well, I’m not saying it’s literally a doomsday scenario, just that it likely wouldn’t benefit the person dreaming about it more than it would harm them.

                  • DreadTowel@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Nono, inflation is the right word. Inflation isn’t caused by the money supply, but by supply vs demand. If demand suddenly increases, there will be inflation. If a lot of money is printed and is thrown in a hole, money supply will increase, but there’ll be no inflation.