96 points SondreDag 2 hours ago 23 comments
eraclide 1 hour ago | parent
https://lowendtalk.com/discussion/222315/gcore-compromised-v...
The title is heavily misleading.
OneDeuxTriSeiGo 44 minutes ago | parent
NGL it's the exact wording I'd personally like to see from a product that had an infra provider have an incident just so that I can mentally tune in enough to figure out if I need to care.
wbl 28 minutes ago | parent
Bunny is doing the right thing here and owning it.
colonCapitalDee 1 hour ago | parent
"Last week, one of our infrastructure providers reported unauthorized access involving third-party server management software. One of our CDN nodes, located in Armenia, was hosted on a server supplied by this provider.
After receiving the alert from the affected provider, our engineering team took immediate action. Within 20 minutes, we stopped routing traffic through the server. We then reviewed and preserved the relevant security logs for investigation, securely wiped the server, and revoked its access to our other systems. The affected server has been permanently removed from our infrastructure."
ptsneves 1 hour ago | parent
freecodeio 1 hour ago | parent
solyin 1 hour ago | parent
> If you manage your own TLS certificates, we recommend revoking and reissuing them with new private keys as a precaution.
Only if you manage them yourself. If Bunny is managing them for you, they'll roll them for you.
boredpudding 12 minutes ago | parent
It does not mean secrets were compromised. It means: If there is a risk customer secrets were compromised, the right thing to do is to assume they were and refresh everything. Even if there's no evidence of it.
bobtheborg 1 hour ago | parent
While neither investigation has found any indication of unauthorized access to our server, we cannot completely rule out the possibility.
If unauthorized access to our CDN node did occur, the potentially exposed information would have been: temporarily cached CDN content, Pull Zone configurations, and TLS certificates stored on that server.
As an additional precaution, we have revoked and reissued all TLS certificates for bunny. net platform domains (b-cdn. net and bunny. run). Reissuance of managed TLS certificates for custom domains is ongoing and is expected to be completed within the next 24 hours. No action is required from customers using managed certificates. We will post a further update on our status page once this process is complete.
If you manage your own TLS certificates, we recommend revoking and reissuing them with new private keys as a precaution.
No other customer data, including bunny. net account data, was stored on the server in question, and no internal systems were affected.
so it seems like the underlying provider potentially allowed, for instance, disk read, that above is what bunny says might have been on disk in this case? Am I reading that right?traceroute66 1 hour ago | parent
Some time ago my colleague and I were doing some due-diligence on Bunny as a potential service provider.
We asked them some basic security questions, nothing low-level, just some basic high-level overview type of stuff to roughly check if they were following well-known best-practices.
Their response was a consistent and constant "cannot tell you due to security reasons".
That rang alarm bells. Any provider such as them who is not sufficiently confident in their security to be willing and able to discuss security at a high-level perspective is not worthy of trust as far as I am concerned.
freecodeio 55 minutes ago | parent
everfrustrated 18 minutes ago | parent
TL;DR you get what you pay for.
asimovDev 59 minutes ago | parent
ameliaquining 42 minutes ago | parent