2 ms·
> since that's a pretty specific accusation. No it's not. It's an entirely vague specification. Was it the Russians, the Chinese, the NSA? It's also somethi
by imron 10y ago
> since that's a pretty specific accusation.
No it's not. It's an entirely vague specification.
Was it the Russians, the Chinese, the NSA?
It's also something they'll never have to prove or verify so from a PR perspective it makes you look far less incompetent if you say 'state sponsored actor' instead of '17 year old high-schooler from Estonia'.
- meowface 10y ago>It's also something they'll never have to prove or verify so from a PR perspective I disagree. In breaches like these, attribution discussion begins pretty quickly after the announcement. If researchers find evidence it was some script kiddie or a black hat group or whatever, that would embarrass Yahoo even more. If you don't know who the attacker is, you have nothing to lose by saying you were compromised by a sophisticated adversary in a targeted attack. You have more to lose by saying a nation-state attacked you if they actually didn't.