Designing the first logo for Have I Been Pwned was easy: I took a SQL injection pattern, wrote "have i been pwned?" after it and then, just to give it a touch of class, put a rectangle with rounded corners around it:
The rebrand we're soft-launching today has been a long time coming, and true to that form, we're not rushing it. This is a "soft launch" in that we're sharing work in progress that's sufficiently evolved to put it out there to the public, but you won't see it in production anywhere yet. The website is no different, the social channels still have the same hero shots and avatars etc. This is the time to seek feedback and tweak before committing more effort into writing code and pushing this to the masses.
A quick primer on "why", as the question has come up a few times whilst previously discussing this. Assume for a moment that my valiant 2013 attempt at a logo was, itself, aesthetically sufficient. It's a hard one to use in different use cases (favicon, merch) and it's quite "busy" in it's current form with no easily recognisable symbol which makes it hard to apply to many use cases. And there are loads of use cases; I mentioned a couple just now, but how about in formal documents such a the contracts we write for enterprise customers? Or as it appears on Stripe-generated invoices, stickers, my 3D printed logos, email signatures and so on and so forth. And branding isn't just a logo, it's a whole set of different use cases and variants of the logo and colours such that you have flexibility to present the brand's image in a cohesive, recognisable fashion. Branding is an art form.
At one point there, I'd had a go at redoing the logo myself. It was terrible. You know how you can have this vision of something aesthetic in your mind and know instantly if it's the right thing when you see it, but just can't quite articulate it yourself? I'm like that with interior design... and logos. So, I reached out to Fiverr for help, and immediately regretted it:
I mean... wow. Ok, I get free revisions, let's give the designer another chance:
Dammit! This just wasn't going to work, and we were going to need to make a much more serious commitment if we wanted this done right. So, we went to Luft Design in Norway as Charlotte and Mikael went way back, and with his help, we went around and around through various iterations of mood boards, design styles, colours and carved out time in Oslo during our visit there in December to sit with Stefan as well and really nut this thing out. I was adamant that I wanted something immediately recognisable but also modern and cohesive without being fussy. Basically, give me everything, which Mikael did:
Let me talk you through the logic of these three variations, beginning with the icon. Mikael initially gave us multiple possible variations of a totally different icons which implied different things. My issue with that is you have to know what the symbology means in order for it to make sense. Perhaps if you're starting from scratch that can work, but when you're a decade+ into a name and a brand, there's history that I think you need to carry forward. One of the variations Mikael did reused that original SQL injection pattern I applied to the logo back in 2013 and just for the sake of justifying my choice, here's what it means for the uninitiated:
Take a SQL query like this:
SELECT * From User WHERE Name = 'blah'
Now, imagine "blah" is untrusted user input, that being data that someone submits via a form, for example. They might then change "blah" to the following:
blah';DROP TABLE USER
We'll shortcut the whole SQL injection lesson about validation of untrusted data and parameterization of queries and just jump straight to the resultant query:
SELECT * From User WHERE Name = 'blah';DROP TABLE USER'
And now, due to the additional query appended to the original one, your user table is gone. However... the SQL has a syntax error as there's a rogue apostrophe hanging off the end, so we fix it by using commenting syntax like so:
blah';DROP TABLE USER;--
Chief among the characters in that pattern are these guys:
';--
And that's the history; these are characters that play a role in the form of attack that has led to so many of the breaches in HIBP today. Turns out they're also really easy to stylise and represent as a concise logo:
We agonised over variations of this for months. The problem is that when you think about all the ones that are really recognisable without accompanying words, they're recognisable because the brand is massive. The Nike swoosh, the Mitsubishi diamonds, the Pepsi circle, the Apple logo etc. HIBP obviously doesn't have that level of cachet, but I really like the simplicity of reach of those, and that's what we have with this one as well as that connection to the history of the brand and the practical use of those characters.
But just as with many of those other recognisable logos, these are times when what is effectively just a logo alone isn't enough, so we have the longer form version:
"Have I Been Pwned" is a mouthful. It's not just long to say, it's long to put on the screen, long to print as a sticker, long to put on a shirt and so on and so forth. "Pwned", on the other hand, is short, concise and, I'd argue, has acheived much greater recognition as a word due to HIBP. Reading how โPWNEDโ went from hacker slang to the internetโs favorite taunt, I think that's a fair conclusion to draw. For a moment, we even toyed with the idea of an actual rename to just "Pwned" and looked at trying to buy pwned.com via a broker which, uh, didn't work out real well:
Appartently, you can put a price on it! So no, we're not renaming anything, we're just providing various stylistic options for representing the logo. This is why we still have the much wordier versions as well:
Unlike old mate at Fiverr, a proper branding exercise like Mikael has done goes well beyond just the logo alone. For example, we have a colour palette:
And we have typography:
Hoodies:
And t-shirts:
You get the idea.
But most importantly, there's the website. Obviously the brand needs to prevail across to the digital realm, but there's also the issue of the front-end tech stack we build on, and that's something I've been thinking about for months now:
In 2013, I built the front end of @haveibeenpwned on Bootstrap and jQuery. In 2025, @stebets and I are rebuilding it as part of a rebrand. What should we use? What are the front end tools that make web dev awesome today? (vanilla HTML, CSS and JS aside, of course)
You can read all sorts of different suggestions in that thread but in the end, we decided to keep it simple:
Bootstrap 5
Vanilla JS (i.e. just write JavaScript without a framework dependency like jQuery)
Sass (which compiles to CSS anyway)
And that's it. Except Stefan and I are busy guys and we really didn't want to invest our precious cycles rebuilding the front end, so we got Ingiber Olafsson to do it. Ingiber came to us via Stefan (so now we have two Icelanders, two Norwegians and... me), and he's been absolutely smashing out the new front end of HIBP:
What I've really enjoyed with Ingiber's approach is that everything he's built is super clean, lightweight and visually beautiful (based on Mikael's work, of course). I've really appreciated his attention to detail that isn't always obvious too, for example making sure accessibility for the visually impaired is maximised:
Ingiber has helped get us to the point where very soon, Stefan and I will begin the integration work to roll the new brand into the main website. That's not just branding work either as the UX is getting a major overhaul. Some stuff is fairly minor: the list of pwned websites is now way too large and we need to have a dedicated page per breach. Other stuff is much more major: we want to have a specific "login" facility (quoting as it will likely remain passwordless by sending a token via email), where we'll then consolidate everything from notification enrolment to domain management to viewing stealer logs. It's a significant paradigm shift that requires a lot of very careful thought.
A quick caveat on the examples above and the others in the repository: we've given Ingiber free reign to experiment and throw ideas around. As a result, we've got some awsome stuff we hadn't thought about before. We've also got some stuff that will be infeasible in the short term, for example, a link through to the official response of the breached company and the full timeline of events. I hope ideas like this keep coming (both from Ingiber and the community), but just keep in mind that some things you see in this repo won't be on the website the day we roll all this out.
As with so much of this project since day one, we're doing this out in the open for everyone to see. Part of that is this blog post heralding what's to come, and part of it is also open sourcing the ux-rebuild repository. I actually created that repo more than a year ago and started crowd-sourcing ideas before closing it off last month whilst Ingiber got working. It's now open again, and I'd like to invite anyone interested to check out what we're building, leave their comments (either here on in the repo), send PRs and so on and so forth. I'm really stoked with the work the guys I've mentioned in this blog post have done, but there will be other great ideas that none of us have thought of yet. And if you come up with something awesome, we already have truckloads of stickers and 3D printed logos I'd love to send you:
So there we have it, that's the rebrand. Do please send us your feedback, not just about logos and look and feel, but also what you'd like to see UX and feature wise on the website. The discussions list on that repo is a great place the chime in or add new ideas, or even just the comments section below ๐
Edit: Wow, all the responses have been awesome! Gotta be honest, I was nervous redefining the brand after so long, but I couldn't have hoped for a better response ๐ I have two quick additions to this post:
I should have thought of this before publishing this post, but we've now published the static HTML pages to preview.haveibeenpwned.com. This is running on Cloudflare pages and is auto-deployed on each GitHub merge into main, so you'll see this continue to evolve over the coming weeks.
I think I've finally caught my breath after dealing with those 23 billion rows of stealer logs last week. That was a bit intense, as is usually the way after any large incident goes into HIBP. But the confusing nature of stealer logs coupled with an overtly long blog post explaining them and the conflation of which services needed a subscription versus which were easily accessible by anyone made for a very intense last 6 days. And there were the issues around source data integrity on top of everything else, but I'll come back to that.
When we launched the ability to search through stealer logs last month, that wasn't the first corpus of data from an info stealer we'd loaded, it was just the first time we'd made the website domains they expose searchable. Now that we have an actual model around this, we're going to start going back through those prior incidents and backfilling the new searchable attributes. We've just done that with the 26M unique email address corpus from August last year and added a bunch previously unseen instances of an email address mapped against a website domain. We've also now flagged that incident as "IsStealerLog", so if you're using the API, you'll see that attribute now set to true.
For the most part, that data is all handled just the same as the existing stealer log data: we map email addresses to the domains they've appeared against in the logs then make all that searchable by full email address, email address domain or website domain (read last week's really, really long blog post if you need an explainer on that). But there's one crucial difference that we're applying both to the backfilling and the existing data, and that's related to a bit of cleaning up.
A theme that emerged last week was that there were email addresses that only appeared against one domain, and that was the domain the address itself was on. If john@gmail.com is in there and the only domain he appears against is gmail.com, what's up with that? At face value, John's details have been snared whilst logging on to Gmail, but it doesn't make sense that someone infected with an info stealer only has one website they've logging into captured by the malware. It should be many. This seems to be due to a combination of the source data containing credential stuffing rows (just email and password pairs) amidst info stealer data and somewhere in our processing pipeline, introducing integrity issues due to the odd inputs. Garbage in, garbage out, as they say.
So, we've decided to apply some Occam's razor to the situation and go with the simplest explanation: a single entry for an email address on the domain of that email address is unlikely to indicate an info stealer infection, so we're removing those rows. And not adding any more that meet that criteria. But there's no doubt the email address itself existed in the source; there is no level of integrity issues or parsing errors that causes john@gmail.com to appear out of thin air, so we're not removing the email addresses in the breach, just their mapping to the domain in the stealer log. I'd already explained such a condition in Jan, where there might be an email address in the breach but no corresponding stealer log entry:
The gap is explained by a combination of email addresses that appeared against invalidly formed domains and in some cases, addresses that only appeared with a password and not a domain. Criminals aren't exactly renowned for dumping perfectly formed data sets we can seamlessly work with, and I hope folks that fall into that few percent gap understand this limitation.
FWIW, entries that matched this pattern accounted for 13.6% of all rows in the stealer log table, so this hasn't made a great deal of difference in terms of outright volume.
This takes away a great deal of confusion regarding the infection status of the address owner. As part of this revision, we've updated all the stealer log counts seen on domain search dashboards, so if you're using that feature, you may see the number drop based on the purged data or increase based on the backfilled data. And we're not sending out any additional notifications for backfilled data either; there's a threshold at which comms becomes more noise than signal and I've a strong suspicion that's how it would be received if we started sending emails saying "hey, that stealer log breach from ages ago now has more data".
And that's it. We'll keep backfilling data, and the entire corpus within HIBP is now cleaner and more succinct. And we'll definitely clean up all the UX and website copy as part of our impending rebrand to ensure everything is a lot clearer in the future.
I'll leave you with a bit of levity related to subscription costs and value. As I recently lamented, resellers can be a nightmare to deal with, and we're seriously considering banning them altogether. But occasionally, they inadvertently share more than they should, and we get an insight into how the outside world views the service. Like a recent case where a reseller accidentally sent us the invoice they'd intended to send the customer who wanted to purchase from us, complete with a 131% price markup ๐ฒ It was an annual Pwned 4 subscription that's meant to be $1,370, and simply to buy this on that customer's behalf and then hand them over to us, the reseller was charging $3,165. They can do this because we make the service dirt cheap. How do we know it's dirt cheap? Because another reseller inadvertently sent us this internal communication today:
FWIW, we do have credit cards in Australia, and they work just the same as everywhere else. I still vehemently dislike resellers, but at least our customers are getting a good deal, especially when they buy direct ๐
I like to start long blog posts with a tl;dr, so here it is:
We've ingested a corpus of 1.5TB worth of stealer logs known as "ALIEN TXTBASE" into Have I Been Pwned. They contain 23 billion rows with 493 million unique website and email address pairs, affecting 284M unique email addresses. We've also added 244M passwords we've never seen before to Pwned Passwords and updated the counts against another 199M that were already in there. Finally, we now have a way for domain owners to query their entire domain for stealer logs and for website operators to identify customers who have had their email addresses snared when entering them into the site. (Note: stealer logs are still freely and easily searchable by individuals, scroll to the bottom for a walkthrough.)
This work has been a month-long saga that began hot off the heels of processing the last massive stash of stealer logs in the middle of Jan. That was the first time we'd ever added more context to stealer logs by way of making the websites email addresses had been logged against searchable. To save me repeating it all here, if you're unfamiliar with stealer logs as a concept and what we've previously done with HIBP, start there.
Up to speed? Good, let's talk about ALIEN TXTBASE.
Origin Story
Last month after loading the aforementioned corpus of data, someone in a government agency reached out and pointed me in the direction of more data by way of two files totalling just over 5GB. Their file names respectively contained the numbers "703" and "704", the word "Alien" and the following text at the beginning of each file:
Pulling the threads, it turned out the Telegram channel referred to contained 744 files of which my contact had come across just the two. The data I'm writing about today is that full corpus, published to Telegram as individual files:
The file in the image above contained over 36 million rows of data consisting of website URLs and the email addresses and passwords entered into them. But the file is just a sample - a teaser - with more data available via the subscription options offered in the message. And that's the monetisation route: provide existing data for free, then offer a subscription to feed newly obtained logs to consuming criminals with a desire to exploit the victims again. Again? The stealer logs are obtained in the first place by exploiting the victim's machine, for example:
How do people end up in stealer logs? By doing dumb stuff like this: โAround October I downloaded a pirated version of Adobe AE and after that a trojan got into my pcโ pic.twitter.com/igEzOayCu6
So now this guy has malware running on his PC which is siphoning up all his credentials as they're entered into websites. It's those credentials that are then sold in the stealer logs and later used to access the victim's accounts, which is the second exploitation. Pirating software is just one way victims become infected; have a read of this recent case study from our Australian Signals Directorate:
When working from home, Alice remotely accesses the corporate network of her organisation using her personal laptop. Aliceย downloaded, onto herย personal laptop, a version of Notepad++ from a website she believed to be legitimate. Anย info stealerย was disguised as the installer for the Notepad++ software.
When Alice attempted to install the software, the info stealer activated and beganย harvesting user credentialsย from her laptop. This included her work username and password, which she had saved in her web browserโs saved logins feature. The info stealer then sent those user credentials to a remote command-and-control server controlled by a cybercriminal group.
Eventually, data like Alice's ends up in places like this Telegram channel and from there, it enables further crimes. From the same ASD article:
Stolen valid user credentials are highly valuable to cybercriminals, because they expedite the initial access to corporate networks and enterprise systems.
So, that's where the data has come from. As I said earlier, ALIEN TXTBASE is by no means the only Telegram channel out there, but it is definitely a major distribution channel.
Verification
When there's a breach of a discrete website, verification of the incident is usually pretty trivial. For example, if Netflix suffered a breach (and I have no indication they have, this is just an example), I can go to their website, head to the password reset field, enter a made-up email address and see a response like this:
On the other hand, an address that does exist on the service usually returns a message to the effect of "we've sent you a password reset email". This is called an "enumeration vector" in that it enables you to enumerate through a list of email addresses and find out which ones have an account on the site.
But stealer logs don't come from a single source like Netflix, instead they contain the credentials for a whole range of different sites visited by people infected with malware. However, I can still take lines from the stealer logs that were captured against Netflix and test the email addresses. (Note: I never test if the password is valid, that would be a privacy violation that constitutes unauthorised access and besides, as you'll read next, there's simply no need to.)
Initially, I actually ran into a bit of a roadblock when testing this:
I found this over and over again so, I went back and checked the source data and inspected this poor victim's record:
Their Netflix credentials were snared when they were entered into the website with a path of "/ph-en/login", implying they're likely Filipino. Let's try VPN'ing into Manilla:
And suddenly, a password reset gives me exactly what I need:
That's a little tangent from stealer logs, but Netflix obviously applies some geo-fencing logic to certain features. This actually worked out better than expected verification-wise because not only was I able to confirm the presence of the email address on their service, but that the stealer log entry placing them in the Philippines was also geographically correct. It was reproducible too: when I saw "something went wrong", but the path began with "mx", I VPN'd into Mexico City and Netflix happily confirmed the reset email was sent. Another path had "ve", so it was off to Caracas and the Venezuelan victim's account was confirmed. You get the idea. So, strong signal on confirmation of account existence via password reset, now let's also try something more personal.
I emailed a handful of HIBP subscribers and asked for their support verifying a breach. I got a fast, willing response from one guy and sent over more than 1,100 rows of data against his address ๐ฒ It's fascinating what you can tell about a person from stealer log data: He's obviously German based on the presence of websites with a .de address, and he uses all the usual stuff most of us do (Amazon, eBay, LinkedIn, Airbnb). But it's the less common ones that make for more interesting reading: He drives a Mercedes because he's been logging into an address there for owners, and it also appears he likes whisky given his account at an online specialist. He's a Firefox user, as he's logged in there too, and he seems to be a techie as he's logged into Seagate and a site selling some very specialised electrical testing equipment. But is it legit?
Imagine the heart-in-mouth moment the poor guy must have had seeing his digital life laid out in front of him like that and knowing criminals have this data. It'd be a hell of a shock.
Having said all that, whilst I'm confident there's a large volume of legitimate data in this corpus, it's also possible there will be junk. Fabricated email addresses, websites that were never used, etc. I hope folks who experience this can appreciate how hard it is for us to discern "legitimate" stealer logs from those that were made up. We've done as much parsing and validation as possible, but we have no way of knowing if someone@yourdomain.com is an email address that actually exists or if it does, if they ever actually used Netflix or Spotify or whatever. They're just strings of data, and all we can do is report them as found.
Searching Entries Against Your Website with a Pwned 5 Subscription
When we published the stealer logs last month, I kept caveating everything with "experimental". Even the first word of the blog post title was "experimenting", simply because we didn't know how this would be received. Would people welcome the additional data we were making available? Or find it unactionable noise? It turns out it was entirely the former, and I didn't see a single negative comment or, as it often has been in the past with stealer logs or malware breaches, angry victims demanding I send their entire row(s) of data. And I guess that makes sense given what we made available so, starting today, we're making even more available!
First, a bit of nomenclature. Consider the following stealer log entry:
There are four parts to this entry that are relevant to the HIBP services I'm going to write about here:
ย
ย
ย
Email Address
ย
ย
Website Domain
ย
Email Alias
ย
Email Domain
ย
https://
www.netflix.com
/en-ph/login
john
@
example.com
P@ssw0rd
Last month, we added functionality to the UI such that after verifying your email address you could see a collection of website domains. In the example above, this meant that John could use the free notification service to verify control of his email address after which he'd see www.netflix.com listed. (Note: we're presently totally redesigning this as part of our UX rebuild and it'll be much smoother in the very near future.) Likewise, we introduced an API to do exactly the same thing, but only after verifying control of the email domain. So, in the case above, the owner of example.com would be able to query john@example.com and get back www.netflix.com (along with any other website domains poor John had been using).
Today, we're introducing two new APIs, and they're big ones:
Query stealer logs by email domain
Query stealer logs by website domain
The first one is akin to our existing domain search feature so in the example above, the owner of the domain could query the stealer logs for example.com and get back each email address alias and the website domains they appear against. Here's what that output looks like:
The previous model only allowed querying by email address, so you could end up with an organisation needing to iterate through thousands of individual API requests. This model means that can now be done in a single request, which will make life much easier for larger organisations assessing the exposure of their workforce.
The second new API is designed for website operators who want to identify customers who've had their credentials snared at login. So, in our demo row above, Netflix could query www.netflix.com (after verifying control of the domain, of course) and retrieve a list of their customers from the stealer logs:
[
"john@example.com",
"jane@yahoo.com"
]
Both these new APIs are orientated towards larger organisations and can return vast volumes of data. When considering how to price this service, the simplest, most commensurate model we arrived at was to use a pricing tier we already had: Pwned 5:
Whilst we'd previously only ever listed tiers 1 through 4, we'd always had higher tiers sitting there in the background for organisations needing higher rate limits. Surfacing this subscription and adding the ability to query stealer logs via these two new APIs makes it easy for new and existing subscribers alike to unlock the feature. And if you are an existing subscriber, the price is simply adjusted pro rata at Stripe's end such that your existing balance is carried forward. Per the above image, this subscription is available either monthly or annually so if you just want to see what's in the current corpus of data and keep the cost down, take it for a month then cancel it. (Note: the Pwned 5 subscription is also now required for the API to search by email address we launched last month, but the web UI that uses the notification service to show stealer log results by email is absolutely still free and will remain that way.)
Another small addition since last month is that we've added an "IsStealerLog" flag on the breach model. This means that anyone programmatically dealing with data in HIBP can now easily elect to handle stealer logs differently than other breaches. For example, a new breach with this flag set to "true" might then trigger a query of the new API endpoints to search by domain so that an organisation can update their records with any new stealer log entries.
Anyone searching by email domain already knows the scope of addresses on their domain as it's reported on their dashboard. Plus, when email notifications are sent on breach load it tells you exactly how many new addresses from your domains are in the breach. Starting today, we've also added a column to explain how many email addresses appear against your website domain:
In other words, 3 people have had their email address grabbed by an info stealer when logging on to hibp-integration-tests.com, and the new API will return all of those addresses. It is only API-based for the moment, we'll consider if a UI makes sense as part of the rebranded site launch, it may not becuase of the potentially huge volumes of data.
Just one last thing: for the two new APIs that query by domain, we've set a rate limit which is entirely independent of the rate limit on, say, breached account searches. Whilst a Pwned 5 subscription would allow 1,000 requests to that API every minute, it's significantly more restricted when hitting those two new stealer log APIs. We haven't published a number as I expect we'll tweak it a bit based on usage, but it's more than enough for any normal use of the service whilst ensuring we don't get completely overwhelmed by high-overhead searches. The stealer log API that queries by email address inherits the 1,000 RPM rate limit of the Pwned 5 subscription.
We've Added 244M New Passwords to Pwned Passwords
One of the coolest most awesome best things we've ever done with HIBP is to create a massive repository of passwords that's all open source (both code and data) and can be queried anonymously without disclosing the searched password. Pwned Passwords is amazing, and it has gained huge traction:
There it is - weโve now passed 10,000,000,000 requests to Pwned Password in 30 days ๐ฎ This is made possible with @Cloudflareโs support, massively edge caching the data to make it super fast and highly available for everyone. pic.twitter.com/kw3C9gsHmB
10 billion times a month, our API helps a service somewhere assist one of their customers with making a good password choice. And that's just the API - we have no idea the full scope of the service as having the data open source means people can just download the entire corpus and run it themselves.
Per the opening para, we now have an additional 244 million previously unseen passwords in this corpus. And, as always, they make for some fun reading:
tender-kangaroo
swimmingkangaroo59
gentlekangaroo
CaptainKangaroo340
And, uh, some kangaroos doing other stuff I can't really repeat here. Those passwords are at the final stages of loading and should flush through cache to Cloudflare's hundreds of edge nodes in the next few hours. That's another quarter of a billion that join the list of previously breached ones, whilst 199 million we'd already seen before have had their prevalence counts upped.
HIBP in Practice
It's amazing to see where my little pet project with the stupid name has gone, and nobody is more surprised than me when it pops up in cool places. Looking around for some stealer log references while writing this blog post, I came across this one:
This was already in place when you created a new account or updated your password. But now it's also verified on every login against the live HIBP database. Hats off to the tremendous service HIBP provides to the internet ๐ https://t.co/Z61AgDaL2t
That's awesome! That's exactly the sort of use case that speaks to the motto of "do good things with breach data after bad things happen". By adding this latest trove of data, the folks using Basecamp will immediately benefit simply by virtue of the service being plugged into our API. And sidenote: David has done some amazing stuff in the past so I was especially excited to see this shout-out ๐
This one is a similar story, albeit using Pwned Passwords:
Their service is phenomenal! We also inform users in our product if they set/change their password to a known password that has been hacked. Admins have the option to not allow for users to use these passwords, if they wish. pic.twitter.com/bvLfYm9xzH
Inevitably, those requests form a slice of the 10 billion monthly we see that are now able to identify a quarter of a billion more compromised ones and hopefully, keep them out of harm's way.
For many organisations, the data we're making available via stealer logs is the missing piece of the puzzle that explains patterns that were previously unexplainable:
Gotta say Iโm pretty happy with what we did with stealer logs last week, think weโre gonna need to do more of this ๐ pic.twitter.com/4rMaMmL8LU
I've had so many emails to that effect after loading various stealer logs over the years. The constant theme I love hearing is how it benefits the good guys and, well, not so much the bad guys:
The introduction of these new APIs today will finally help many organisations identify the source of malicious activity and even more importantly, get ahead of it and block it before it does damange. Whilst there won't be any set cadence to the addition of more stealer logs (obviously, we can't really predict when this stuff will emerge), I have no doubt we'll continue to add a lot more data yet.
Techie Bits
Processing this data has been non-trivial to say the least, so I thought I'd give you a bit of an overview of how I ultimately approached it. In essence, we're talking about transforming a very large amount of highly redundant text-based data and ultimately ending up with a distinct list of email addresses against website domains. Here's the high-level process:
Start with 744 files of logs totalling 1.5TB and containing 23 billion rows
In a .NET console app, process each file in point 1 and extract the domain and email address from valid lines (domain, email and password, all colon delimited) to produce 744 files totalling 390GB (9.7B rows)
In another .NET console app, consolidate all 744 files from the previous point into a single file with a distinct set of website domain and email address pairs (789M rows)
Take the file from the previous point, and in another .NET console app, extract all the unique domains (18M rows)
Use SQL BCP to upload the files from the two previous points to SQL Azure
Insert any new domains that don't already exist in HIBP (these are held in a dedicated table) via a TSQL statement (6.7M rows)
Upload the 284M unique email addresses like with a typical data breach (69% of them were already in HIBP)
Join the distinct list of domains and email addresses to the data uploaded in the previous point and insert email and domain pairs into the stealer log table, but only if they haven't been seen before via another TSQL statement (493M rows)
Wait - if I took distinct website and email pairs in step 4 and got 789M rows then in step 9 it only inserted 493M, what happened? There were 220M rows already in HIBP from last month which will account for some of the gap (existing records aren't reinserted), and there was also some additional validation in SQL Server courtesy of code we only have in that environment. The remaining gap is explained by the .NET code not ignoring case on distinct, so in other words, I dumped and uploaded way more data than I had to and made SQL Sever do extra work ๐คฆโโ๏ธ
Go live and get ๐บ
It was actually much, much harder than this due to the trials and errors of attempting to distil what starts out as tens of billions of rows down into hundreds of millions of unique examples. I was initially doing a lot more of the processing in SQL Azure because hey, it's just cloud and you can turn up the performance as much as you want, right?! After running 80 cores of Azure SQL Hyperscale for days on end ($ouch$) and seeing no end in sight to the execution of queries intended to take distinct values across billions of rows, I fell back to local processing with .NET. You could, of course, use all sorts of other technologies of choice here, but it turned out that local processing with some hand-rolled code was way more efficient than delegating the task to a cloud-based RDBMS. The space used by the database tells a big part of the story:
As I've said many times before, the cloud, my friends, is not always the answer. Do as much processing as possible locally on sunk-cost hardware unless there's a compelling reason not to.
I've detailed all this here in part because that's what I've always done with this project over the last 11 and a bit years, but also to illustrate how much time, effort, and money is burned processing data like this. It's very non-trivial, especially not when everything has to ultimately go into an increasingly large system with loads of external dependencies and be fast, reliable and cost-effective.
Conclusion
From 23 billion raw rows down to a much more manageable and discrete set of data, the latest stealer logs are now searchable via all the ways you've done for years, plus those two new domain-based stealer log APIs. We've called this breach "ALIEN TXTBASE Stealer Logs", let's see what positive outcomes we can all now produce with the data.
Edit 1: Let me re-emphasise an important point from the blog post I think got a bit buried: The web UI that uses the notification service to show stealer log results by email is absolutely still free and will remain that way. If youโve got an email address in this breach and you want to see the stealer log domains against it, do this:
Fill in your email address and send yourself the verification email
Click the link emailed to you and scroll to the bottom of the page where you'll find a message similar to this:
We need to make this clearer as it's obviously confusing. Thanks for everyone's feedback, we're working on it.
Edit 2:I've just published a (much shorter!) blog post that addresses a common theme in the comments regarding email addresses that only appear against a single website domain, being the same domain as the email address itself is on. Check that out if that's you.
Nearly four years ago now, I set out to write a book with Charlotte and RobIt was the stories behind the stories, the things that drove me to write my most important blog posts, and then the things that happened afterwards. It's almost like a collection of meta posts, each one adding behind-the-scenes commentary that most people reading my material didn't know about at the time.
It was a strange time for all of us back then. I didn't leave the country for the first time in over a decade. I barely even left the state. I had time to toil on the passion project that became this book. As I wrote about years later, there were also other things occupying my mind at the time. Writing this book was cathartic, providing me the opportunity to express some of the emotions I was feeling at the time and to reflect on life.
Speaking of reflecting, this week was Have I Been Pwned's 11th birthday. Reaching this milestone, getting back to travel (I'm writing this poolside with a beer at a beautiful hotel in Dubai), life settling down (while sitting next to my amazing wife), and it now being 2 years since we launched the book, I decided we should just give it away for free. I mean really free, not "give me all your personal details, then here's a download link" I mean, here are the direct download links:
I hope you enjoy the book. It's the culmination of so many things I worked so hard to create over the preceding decade and a half, and I'm really happy to just be giving it away now. Enjoy the book ๐