3 ms·

So basically, the cloud providers got hacked over and over but didn't tell all their clients, who in turn had to discover they used a provided with bad security

• placatedmayhem 7y ago
  Why not both? At least, it's safer to assume both when choosing a platform and where to spend dollars. Security is important yet, in my experience, even more underfunded than reliability -- features are generally king. A platform that repeatedly gets breached shows they don't value security as much as they should. An attacker that has been successful previously should continue to be successful except against those targets that secure themselves.
• ariwilson 7y ago
  The cloud providers? Are you referring to HPE and Ericsson here?
• calimac 7y ago
  Exactly! HPE concealing the attack emboldened the attackers and weakened the cumulative defenses of all other Enterprises who would have been on high alert if warned! Poor decision by HPE. So sad because I like Neiri
• Maarten88 7y ago
  Not only incompetent, also untrustworthy, which i.m.o. is even worse. “The security of HPE customer data is always our top priority” The story then tells otherwise - they kept relevant information from affected customers and even thwarted their own investigation team to keep customers in the dark. Clearly public image and short-term financial results were the real priorities. Also a lot of questions are dodged with the "we have found no evidence in any of our extensive investigations that..." answer that provides full deniability. That only makes it plausible that much more happened here.