4 ms·
It was a bit more than that. The attack was against AT&T, there was zero public interest in the information from a whistleblower perspective, the victims were
by RIMR 6y ago
It was a bit more than that. The attack was against AT&T, there was zero public interest in the information from a whistleblower perspective, the victims were customers of AT&T, a telecommunications provider.
Dumping the contents of a far-right website that helped push for Insurrection against the US Government seems pretty tame by comparison.
Also, Weev is open and proudly a Nazi, so the optics of bringing him up while defending the rights of a Fascist website isn't great.
- bgentry 6y ago>The attack was against AT&T, there was zero public interest in the information from a whistleblower perspective, the victims were customers of AT&T, a telecommunications provider. You think there's "zero public interest" in knowing that a large US corporation, with private information about a significant fraction of the American public, has neglected their obligations to protect that private information? And that they've ignored all pleas to treat the vulnerability with the seriousness it deserves? >Also, Weev is open and proudly a Nazi, so the optics of bringing him up while defending the rights of a Fascist website isn't great. How are his political leanings relevant to the question of whether accessing this data would constitute a crime?