4 ms·

and Facebook couldn't see any evidence this hack was worth $30,000 until there was video evidence and a detailed description given to them exclusively, with no

and Facebook couldn't see any evidence this hack was worth $30,000 until there was video evidence and a detailed description given to them exclusively, with no information on message boards of articles to put it in the collective conscious, or “peer review” publicly. so does your perception matter? anyway I detailed how the instagram economy works in one of my other comments Also it wouldn't be temporary access lol. When you take over an instagram account you change the email address and the username twice, the person you took it from gets the alert email for the first change, the second email gets the alert for the second change to the third email address. The original owner doesn't know what/where the account is anymore.

tptacek 7y ago
It's not "worth" $30,000; it's probably worth much less than that. The $30,000 has a much more powerful marketing function than it does intrinsic utility. It's temporary access because you can trivially write a tool that goes through Facebook's audit logs to find out which accounts have likely been taken over using this tool, which is something Facebook would certainly do if there was evidence that people had been exploiting it at any kind of scale. A big chunk of my last year has been in ATO detection and mitigation and I think you'd be surprised what kind of dumb stuff generates serious investigations from companies with far fewer security team resources than Facebook.