5 ms·

C'mon, Wired. Hacker? He logged into the web interface from home using a password. The better headline would have been "Poor Security Allows Disgruntled Emplo

C'mon, Wired. Hacker? He logged into the web interface from home using a password. The better headline would have been "Poor Security Allows Disgruntled Employee to Disable Over 100 Cars Remotely."

roc 17y ago
Suppose he did use another employees account. Suppose he used social engineering tricks to get that user to reveal his password. That was Mitnick's MO and most have long since ceded him the epithet "hacker". That said: > "Omar was pretty good with computers" If he really was, he'd have used Tor and they'd have never known it was him.
- rbanffy 17y ago
  > That was Mitnick's MO and most have long since ceded him the epithet "hacker". Well... I haven't ;-)
sili 17y ago
"Omar was pretty good with computers" does not a hacker make. At most what he did was social engineering by obtaining a login of another employee. It would be interesting to see how exactly he got the password, but I guess that is "part of an ongoing investigation."
- ax0n 17y ago
  I'd suggest that any way you get around a given system has hack value. As someone else mentioned: social engineers have been called "hackers" before. When I was doing penetration tests a decade ago, some of my best client engagements required little technical skill to gain access to some of the most prized data on the network (HR, Payroll, access to update the website). You'd be surprised how far you can get in many organizations without exploiting a single software or technology weakness.
  - fnid2 17y ago
    Humans are almost always the biggest weakness in any system.
ax0n 17y ago
It wasn't likely to be so much "poor security" as it was likely to be a weakly protected account: a shared ID for everyone or credentials sitting in plain view.
- joe_the_user 17y ago
  What isn't "poor security" about "a weakly protected account: a shared ID for everyone or credentials sitting in plain view." When access to other people's stuff is controlled by a given account, unless that there is good protections on every level, you're in trouble, you have poor security.
  - ax0n 17y ago
    You implied blame at the provider level. We might as well run a headline saying "Security flaw to blame for rash of area burglaries" when said security flaw was the failure to lock the front door.

C'mon, Wired. Hacker? He logged into the web interface from home using a password. The better headline would have been "Poor Security Allows Disgruntled Employee to Disable Over 100 Cars Remotely."

roc 17y ago

Suppose he did use another employees account. Suppose he used social engineering tricks to get that user to reveal his password. That was Mitnick's MO and most have long since ceded him the epithet "hacker". That said: > "Omar was pretty good with computers" If he really was, he'd have used Tor and they'd have never known it was him.

rbanffy 17y ago
> That was Mitnick's MO and most have long since ceded him the epithet "hacker". Well... I haven't ;-)

sili 17y ago

"Omar was pretty good with computers" does not a hacker make. At most what he did was social engineering by obtaining a login of another employee. It would be interesting to see how exactly he got the password, but I guess that is "part of an ongoing investigation."

ax0n 17y ago
I'd suggest that any way you get around a given system has hack value. As someone else mentioned: social engineers have been called "hackers" before. When I was doing penetration tests a decade ago, some of my best client engagements required little technical skill to gain access to some of the most prized data on the network (HR, Payroll, access to update the website). You'd be surprised how far you can get in many organizations without exploiting a single software or technology weakness.
- fnid2 17y ago
  Humans are almost always the biggest weakness in any system.

ax0n 17y ago

It wasn't likely to be so much "poor security" as it was likely to be a weakly protected account: a shared ID for everyone or credentials sitting in plain view.

joe_the_user 17y ago
What isn't "poor security" about "a weakly protected account: a shared ID for everyone or credentials sitting in plain view." When access to other people's stuff is controlled by a given account, unless that there is good protections on every level, you're in trouble, you have poor security.
- ax0n 17y ago
  You implied blame at the provider level. We might as well run a headline saying "Security flaw to blame for rash of area burglaries" when said security flaw was the failure to lock the front door.