3 ms·
They changed the link. It was pointing to another one that cited this one as the source and added -even more- speculation on top of it.
by dejaime 8y ago
They changed the link. It was pointing to another one that cited this one as the source and added -even more- speculation on top of it.
- dejaime 8y agoHere you go https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2018/11/21/hacker-erases-6500-sites-from-the-dark-web https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2018/11/21/hacker-erases-65... This adds speculation and sensationalism on top of an ill informed article. They even defined it as a 0-day vulnerability, when it is obviously not the case as explained by the article itself. Can't simply trust the quality of the information in there.