5 ms·

Arguably, there's utility in the fact that the ps3s are all the same hardware, and need only one patch. Of course, the Xbox is also, but the point made in the

Arguably, there's utility in the fact that the ps3s are all the same hardware, and need only one patch. Of course, the Xbox is also, but the point made in the article was that the PS3 botnet would be quite a lot stronger than a 360 botnet. Hacking microsoft/google/apple/etc would lead to having to use software on a botnet comprised of a wide range of hardware... So on what applications does that tradeoff of utility against the difficulty of hacking Sony make sense?

Retric 15y ago
The PS3 may be slightly more powerful than the Xbox 360, but what is important is the number of them connected to the internet which seems to be much higher in the Xbox camp.
watty 15y ago
Maybe a PS3 botnet would be more powerful, but does it matter? The article itself pointed out two problems (MiTM and DDOS) which would be equally efficient on PS3 or 360. Forget Xbox 360 altogether, if we can break into an update server wouldn't Windows Update be the better target? 350M Windows 7 licenses alone, talk about a botnet. Having different hardware doesn't make a difference. Edit: I realize none of this this easy, I'm just trying to play devils advocate regarding the glossed over "If they then compromised the PSN update servers...".
- Unseelie 15y ago
  Try a reply to both watty and retric, which is, if someone wanted a botnet, the case is that they went after Sony, which indicates that Sony had a vulnerability. Of course, everyone has vulnerabilities, but the coincidence is likely that this is one that both existed, and the hackers knew about. Sorry that my best answer to the inherent question is 'coincidence'. That's supposing that someone wanted a botnet..and we're all supposing they had a great deal of planning. I'd expect such an event to hinge on a great deal of chance..

5 ms·

Arguably, there's utility in the fact that the ps3s are all the same hardware, and need only one patch. Of course, the Xbox is also, but the point made in the

by Unseelie 15y ago

Retric 15y ago
The PS3 may be slightly more powerful than the Xbox 360, but what is important is the number of them connected to the internet which seems to be much higher in the Xbox camp.
watty 15y ago
Maybe a PS3 botnet would be more powerful, but does it matter? The article itself pointed out two problems (MiTM and DDOS) which would be equally efficient on PS3 or 360. Forget Xbox 360 altogether, if we can break into an update server wouldn't Windows Update be the better target? 350M Windows 7 licenses alone, talk about a botnet. Having different hardware doesn't make a difference. Edit: I realize none of this this easy, I'm just trying to play devils advocate regarding the glossed over "If they then compromised the PSN update servers...".
- Unseelie 15y ago
  Try a reply to both watty and retric, which is, if someone wanted a botnet, the case is that they went after Sony, which indicates that Sony had a vulnerability. Of course, everyone has vulnerabilities, but the coincidence is likely that this is one that both existed, and the hackers knew about. Sorry that my best answer to the inherent question is 'coincidence'. That's supposing that someone wanted a botnet..and we're all supposing they had a great deal of planning. I'd expect such an event to hinge on a great deal of chance..