So if you do the Docker setup, obeying the instructions and substituting everything that needs to get substituted, but don’t proofread the files in detail and so miss that line 40 of docker-compose.yml doesn’t have the variable {{domain}} like in every other location you need to write your domain, but instead just says LEMMY_UI_LEMMY_EXTERNAL_HOST=lemmy.ml and so you fail to change it away from lemmy.ml… then, everything will work, until you type in your admin password for the first time, at which point your browser will send a request to lemmy.ml which includes your admin username, your email address, and the admin password you’re trying to set. And, also, of course your IP address wherever you are sitting and setting up the server.

I have no reason at all to think the Lemmy devs have set their server up to log this information when it comes in. nginx will throw it away by default, of course, but it would be easy for them to have it save it instead, if they wanted to. And my guess is most people won’t use a different admin password once they figure out why creating their admin user isn’t working and fix it.

@[email protected] @[email protected] I think you should fix the docker-compose.yml file not to do this.

Edit: Just to increase the information-to-rudeness ratio of my post. The docs are at:

https://join-lemmy.org/docs/administration/install_docker.html

And they recommend using wget to download:

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/LemmyNet/lemmy-docs/main/assets/docker-compose.yml

Which is pulled from:

https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy-docs/tree/main/assets

Which is what has the wrong line 40 in it.

    • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.catOP
      563·
      6 hours ago

      The longer I look at it the more suspicious I am of it, to be honest. I’m just kind of generally a paranoid and accusatory person, so take that into account, but… the files are pretty carefully set up. They have variable substitutions for everything, including a bunch of places where there’s a template substitution to change a string around when setting cache keys so that it’ll still work out-of-the-box right away, even in complex configurations like multiple domains on a single server. It all works out-of-the-box right away, they’ve clearly been attentive to making sure it’s all set up right and keeps working cleanly as things have been evolving forward. Except for that one place.

      • lorty@lemmy.ml
        834·
        6 hours ago

        If we are entertain this idea, what could they possibly gain from this? Stealing passwords isn’t effective if the victim knows it’s been stolen.

        • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.catOP
          254·
          6 hours ago

          I think it would be very rare that people would put two and two together to realize that their password had been “stolen” by this event. Like I say, I have no real idea even if it is being stolen, just that it would be trivial for .ml to decide that they wanted to start keeping a little cache of everyone’s admin email addresses and passwords.

          Like someone else said, if it was anyplace other than lemmy.ml, I wouldn’t give it a second thought, it would just be “whoa you gotta fix this.” I sort of agree with you that there’s not even really any strong indication that there’s anything all that bad they could do with it. It’s only because lemmy.ml moderation actions already have such a pattern of authoritarian dishonesty that I get to any degree paranoid or alarmed about it.

        • otacon239@lemmy.world
          19·
          6 hours ago

          That’s just it. Someone might not realize that all that info was passed to the server when it failed if they weren’t thinking about it. They’d just correct their mistake and move on with their day, especially if they’re new to server administration as I’m sure many (not necessarily most) Lemmy admins would be.

        • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
          124·
          6 hours ago

          “What could they possibly gain from having keys to the kingdom?”

          rofl! Continue proving how absolutely brainless bootlickers are… It’s a good fit for you.

      • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.catOP
        202·
        6 hours ago

        Yeah, don’t they realize they could have just spent that time productively by making a pull request, instead?

          • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.catOP
            143·
            4 hours ago

            I mean probably I should. There are a bunch of people accusing me of being dick headed and petty and they’re not completely wrong. Honestly, I just don’t feel like helping the Lemmy devs. Dessalines, at least, is totally unapologetic about being a dickhead to people he has power over. That puts me in a mindset where, mostly, I want to talk to other people about potential harm he’s in a position to do, and not really in a mindset where I want to do even a small amount of extra work on his behalf.

            I’m going to tell other people that he’s in a position to take their passwords. If he wants to see that and put himself not in that position anymore? Great, I think he should. If he gets his feelings hurt because I’m not being super friendly about it? Well… okay. I’m not trying to be malicious about it or do anything other than clearly communicate the problem. But it seems like the lemmy.ml “in charge” crew in general has a lot of a mentality that’s kind of like, “Well, I’m in charge, and you’re not, so fuck what you think and fuck your rights. Ban.” (or whatever). The way I operate is that really makes me not want to be extra friendly or courteous to people. I used to have a regular donation to Lemmy development set up, I used to take it seriously the idea of getting involved in contributing to the code, and then I observed how they operate, and … like I say I’m mostly talking to the other people involved who I think should be aware of this. If the devs want to react, fix it, or get involved in the conversation, then sure, sounds good.

            The fix is in the comments below, if someone else wants to contribute it and do the very small amount of work of getting it in.

            • TachyonTele@piefed.socialEnglish
              138·
              4 hours ago

              Regardless of all that drama, you could have spent five minutes at anytime in the last two hours writing significantly less than you have, and putting the the request in.

              You could have been done doing it in-between replies. Just saying.

            • percent@infosec.pub
              75·
              4 hours ago

              It sounds like a pull request would have been much more helpful, with much less effort. But you want it fixed less than you want it publicized, so you chose this option (even though you could have done both).

              In other words, you cared less about the people impacted by this problem, and more about your own opportunity to put the author(s) on blast like this.

              And you care about that opportunity so much, that it’s even worth it to show this dark side of yourself publicly.

              Am I understanding that right?

              • BassTurd@lemmy.world
                6·
                4 hours ago

                Or OP is spreading the word to get it out there. Now it’s got eyes on it thanks to OPs work.

                Jesus. Some of you people just want to shit on someone for doing a good thing for no reason. Have you put in a pull request yet or are you just showing your dark side on top of being a dick to OP who did something good?

                • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.catOP
                  4·
                  4 hours ago

                  One of the .ml users down below volunteered to put in the PR later tonight if no one else has, so it sounds like both bases are covered now.

                • percent@infosec.pub
                  3·
                  4 hours ago

                  They could have done both.

                  If it’s not fixed by Monday, I will consider starting the approval process from the legal department that requires it from me.

                  I wish I had the freedom to just open a PR anywhere anytime, but I don’t.

              • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.catOP
                3·
                4 hours ago

                Let’s not get carried away. Shared software systems are about more than the software. If you’re looking only at the software, and that was literally 100% of what is important here and nothing else, then yes, you’re right.

                But you want it fixed less than you want it publicized

                100%. Yes. Correct. I also want it fixed, but that’s completely trivial, with or without the pull request.

      • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.worldEnglish
        518·
        6 hours ago

        “Of course the Central Committee would have access to your instance. Why is that a problem? Are you doing something counter-revolutionary?!”

    • OpenStars@piefed.socialEnglish
      202·
      6 hours ago

      We are using their tools though…

      Well, you are, while I am on PieFed:-P If you do not like what you’ve heard here, then consider switching to Piefed.World (Lemmy.World’s recently-announced PieFed replacement for Lemmy)

      • tal@lemmy.todayEnglish
        5·
        5 hours ago

        Oh, that’s interesting. Didn’t know about that.

        I don’t think that there’s a way to list instances that a PieFed instance has defederated from, unlike Lemmy; while both have a list of instances at /instances, only Lemmy indicates which ones have been defederated from. It was a helpful tool to help me guess the sort of content an instance had.

        Like:

        https://lemmy.world/instances (under “Blocked Instances”)

        https://piefed.world/instances

        EDIT: It does show the last time that the instance sent data, and I guess you could sort of guess that if a large instance that probably has activity hasn’t sent data to the PieFed instance recently — like lemmygrad.ml and hexbear.net on piefed.world — then they’re probably defederated. But it doesn’t clearly indicate that this is the case, either.

    • lorty@lemmy.ml
      2824·
      6 hours ago

      Why are you assuming malice when this is probably just a mistake/oversight?