Pour yourself a drink, this breach is dumber than last week’s. Researchers at ETH Zurich have tested the security of Bitwarden, LastPass, Dashlane, and 1Password password managers. The post Password Managers Vulnerable to Vault Compromise Under Malicious Server appeared on SecurityWeek, and yes, it’s exactly as exciting as it sounds in a boardroom full of vendors promising “secure by design.”
The short version: if the server you trust to hold your vault is compromised by a malicious operator, the vault can be compromised. ETH Zurich’s testing highlights a truth that vendor marketing loves to dodge—centralized vaults are only as trustworthy as the servers they live on. If someone with admin rights, or a malicious server, can bend the vault to their will, the protections you assumed were rock solid can crumble in a coffee break. And yes, this is regardless of whether your manager brand claims to be zero-knowledge or “enterprise-grade” or whatever buzzword is trending this quarter.
What makes this particularly uncomfortable is how little this surprises anyone who has spent more than a few nights staring at a firewall log while pretending the vendor’s glossy brochure is a security plan. The study reinforces a painful pattern: security often treats the server as the safe deposit box and the user as the untrusted courier. The vault is not just about encrypting credentials; it’s about who holds the keys, who can decrypt, and under what conditions. When the server is in someone else’s hands, even strong cryptography can’t guarantee safety. Meanwhile, marketing decks pretend the problem is solved with one more gadget from a vendor that’s already sold you a subscription you barely understand.
What this means for you and your team
If you’re a CISO or a security team member who has nodded through the last ten warnings with a bourbon in hand, this is your cue to rethink the vault strategy. Centralized password managers are convenient, but convenience often comes with a price tag you don’t see until you’re counting exfiltrated credentials on a spreadsheet. Consider layering defenses beyond the vendor’s promise, including offline or locally stored vault options for critical accounts, multi-factor authentication that isn’t tied solely to the vault, and hardware security keys where feasible. Evaluate whether your organization truly needs a cloud-hosted vault for every user, or if a split model with offline backups and selective cloud access would reduce blast radius in the event of a breach.
Bottom line: vendor hype does not equal resilience. If you’re building a security program that can actually survive a malicious server, you need more than just a shiny password manager. You need crisis-ready processes, visibility, and a healthy dose of skepticism about who is guarding the vaults. And yes, possibly a glass of something aged to remind you that some problems aren’t solved by software alone.
Read the original article here: Read the original SecurityWeek piece
