(Security) hole-ier than thou
  • spacehulk@lemmy.zipEnglish
    16·
    2 days ago

    Why not just give the app away and let people access the content without having them sign up? Oh right… The people are the product.

    • jollyrogue@lemmy.mlEnglish
      13·
      2 days ago

      So they know what sins I’ve committed.

      They don’t follow my mastodon feed. It’s much easier that way.

    • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
      5·
      2 days ago

      They need the list of who’s been naughty and who’s been nice.

      Or is that the other fella?

    • tacosanonymous@mander.xyzEnglish
      91·
      2 days ago

      Historically? Abuse.

      I’m sure they say it’s for security : blocking bots, etc and getting their newsletter or some shit.

    • Tetragrade@leminal.spaceEnglish
      1·
      2 days ago

      I expect they’re using some kind of authentication framework that supports full names in its User entity, and just went with that without considering whether it’s sensible.

      Looks like you can leave comments on prayers? Could also be that they want a particular aesthetic where everyone has their innate “Christian Name”, instead of a username, which is assocated with left wing ideas like digital utopianism. Because…

      Real names also enforce a complex of related authoritarian information structures i.e. they provide information about a person’s culture, race, gender, which you can use to assign them a place within your religion’s moral hierarchy.

  • Zarobi@aussie.zoneEnglish
    57·
    2 days ago

    the API endpoint GET [redacted] will return user data for any account - not just your own account - so long as you supply a valid, five-digit user ID. It doesn’t perform any authorization check or ownership validation. “Just increment the number and get someone else’s data,” she wrote.

    This data includes users’ email addresses, first and last names, country, dates of birth, and whether the account has been deleted, and the API exposes all 719,517 accounts on the prayer site. “With sequential user IDs and no rate limiting, an attacker could enumerate every single account on the platform,” the hacker explained. “One GET request per user. for i in range(1, 719518): scrape(). That’s it. That’s the exploit.”

    My God, that’s horrific. Plus it doesn’t even delete your data if you delete your account, it’s still vulnerable.

    • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      16·
      2 days ago

      I wonder of the vatican is part of the gdpr…
      Would be funny to read about the church getting sued for that.

      • Zarobi@aussie.zoneEnglish
        2·
        2 days ago

        I don’t know much about GDPR… is it illegal to have badly written software like this? Technically the user is bypassing normal usage and “hacking” the API

        • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          13·
          2 days ago

          Negligence to delete the account data after termination is a reason to be fined.
          They don’t need to keep that data.
          Afaik the only reason would be if MTX were offered (for book-keeping reasons)

      • Zarobi@aussie.zoneEnglish
        2·
        2 days ago

        Maybe I should remove that from my comment lol, I feel like I’m contributing to a data breach or something

          • Zarobi@aussie.zoneEnglish
            1·
            2 days ago

            I know, but a lot of people don’t click the article, they just look at headline + comments, so it’s still a reduction of visibility or an extra step. My comment is like exposing the endpoint right there front and centre. Plus, I don’t like being personally responsible for any data breach. Maybe it’s just a tiny thing but it felt like the right thing to do

    • Zeoic@lemmy.worldEnglish
      6·
      2 days ago

      5 digit user ids, yet over 700k users? Im sure they must have gone up to 6 digits

      • Zarobi@aussie.zoneEnglish
        4·
        2 days ago

        They probably meant 6 digit and it was a typo. The rest of the article references 6 digits. If it’s just an integer (highly likely) it would go up to 10 digits or roughly 2 billion max users. My old coworkers and I used to joke that hitting INTEGER.MAX_VALUE for your customer ID is a good problem to have

      • Earthwormjim91@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        2 days ago

        Unless by “digit” they mean any alphanumeric.

        You’ve got a lot of options if you go to a 5 characters with letters.

        Which they’d kind of have to with 700k users if it’s 5 characters.

        If it’s case insensitive, you’ve got 60,000,000+ combinations, and if case sensitive then 916,000,000+ combinations.

        • ViatorOmnium@piefed.socialEnglish
          5·
          2 days ago

          It’s numerical only, but the number doesn’t need leading 0s so anything from 1 to 6 digits might be a valid user ID.

          • Earthwormjim91@lemmy.worldEnglish
            2·
            2 days ago

            That would be an absolute nightmare to administer lol. Though I guess that tracks.

            1, 01, 001, 0001, and 00001 would all be different users

  • Kissaki@feddit.orgEnglish
    22·
    2 days ago

    As it often is, the source has more information, and significantly so. I also find it much easier and more informative to read. Simple direct speech, headlines, more concrete on what is exposed, more technical details, etc.

    They didn’t just send one email to report the vulnerability.

    and on January 3rd I emailed nine people: the general info address, six individual staff members at clicktopray.org, and two contacts at popesprayer.va (the Pope’s Worldwide Prayer Network). No response. From any of them.

    For July they have three entries of ‘reported to Journalist’ (“Dark Reading”), journalist contacted the Pope’s Worldwide Prayer Network, and ‘still no response’.

    They also posted an update about it being fixed on 2026-07-24 that it has been fixed.

    The authorization check is there now: request your own user ID and you still get your email back, request someone else’s and you get a public profile. Names are supposed to be public on a platform where you pray alongside other people, so what’s left is what was always meant to be visible.

    I also never got an email. Not an acknowledgment, not a thank you, not a “we’ve addressed this.”

    Given that The Register posted this article on 2026-07-24 22 UTC it must have been very unfortunate timing. Presumably they didn’t check the source again before pressing publish? And also haven’t noticed or bothered to include an information update.

  • Gork@sopuli.xyzEnglish
    53·
    2 days ago

    The Catholic Church is known for a lot of things. Keeping up with the times (or cyber security) isn’t one of them.

    • jollyrogue@lemmy.mlEnglish
      9·
      2 days ago

      Cyber security isn’t in the bible. Time for an update.

      Cyprus 1:1

      …. Copy pasta of NIST security standards circa May 2026 …

      Nothing could go wrong with this.

    • Kissaki@feddit.orgEnglish
      3·
      2 days ago

      I thought they were known for keeping things under the rug/hidden. Only priest’s not follower’s personal data I guess.

  • username_1@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    47·
    3 days ago

    Vatican Programmer: Oh, mighty Lord, sitting in the Sky, show me the way to this bug I seek and eliminate ineffectiveness. Amen.

    • real_squids@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      19·
      2 days ago

      It connects users across the globe to pray for the Holy Father’s intentions, and as of July 2026, it has 719,517 registered accounts

      The only two screenshots they have on GPlay feature prayer scheduling and sharing your prayer.

      • Kissaki@feddit.orgEnglish
        17·
        2 days ago

        Damn, with that many people praying these prayers are about to get real effective. I’m surprised we haven’t heard of their effects and effectiveness yet.

        • caurvo@aussie.zoneEnglish
          5·
          2 days ago

          I’d like to see the media mix modeling data to really assess the ROP of these prayers. Cross check that against miracle count and we’ll really be cooking.

    • it_depends_man@lemmy.worldEnglish
      6·
      2 days ago

      See, humans are smart. Praying and blessing things yourself? By hand, so to speak? Boooo! Pedestrian! Ain’t nobody got time fo dat!

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prayer_flag

      the Tibetans believe the prayers and mantras will be blown by the wind to spread the good will and compassion into all pervading space. Therefore, prayer flags are thought to bring benefit to all.

      By hanging flags in high places the Lung ta will carry the blessings depicted on the flags to all beings. As wind passes over the surface of the flags, which are sensitive to the slightest movement of the wind, the air is purified and sanctified by the mantras.

      I choose to believe that the prayer app is just a hip, new and with it innovation in prayer spreading.

  • magnetosphere@fedia.io
    4·
    2 days ago

    I’ve seen so many stories about leaks that I skip most of them. I’m glad I didn’t skip this one.