It's possible that this email is a result of forum user creation, so during that submission the plaintext password was available to send to the user. Then it would be hashed and stored.
I'm just explaining how user authentication works for most web applications. The server will process your plaintext password when your account is created. It should then store that as a hashed string, but it can ALSO send out an email with that plaintext password to the user describing their account creation. This post does not identify that passwords are stored in plaintext, it just identifies that they email plaintext passwords which is poor security practice.
Would you accept "in a way that can be reversed"?
It's possible that this email is a result of forum user creation, so during that submission the plaintext password was available to send to the user. Then it would be hashed and stored.
I don't know why you'd give them any benefit of the doubt. They should have already killed that with this terrible security practice.
But yeah, sure, maybe this one giant, extremely visible lapse in security is the only one they have.
I'm just explaining how user authentication works for most web applications. The server will process your plaintext password when your account is created. It should then store that as a hashed string, but it can ALSO send out an email with that plaintext password to the user describing their account creation. This post does not identify that passwords are stored in plaintext, it just identifies that they email plaintext passwords which is poor security practice.
This particular poor security practice is very much like a roach. If you see one you have a bigger problem.
See, I can also repeat myself as though you didn't understand the first time.