4 ms·

I'm glad they were doing it for the lulz. Some day someone's going to be doing it, not for the lulz, and the price we'll have to pay for this kind of massive de

by newobj 15y ago

I'm glad they were doing it for the lulz. Some day someone's going to be doing it, not for the lulz, and the price we'll have to pay for this kind of massive developer/it-sec incompetence will be extremely high. Hopefully this has served as a wake-up call to people who weren't already aware how low the fruit has been hanging.

chrislomax 15y ago
You say you are glad they were doing it for fun and wait for someone to do it not for fun? How do you know it's not already been done? A true hacker wouldn't expose their actions and would continue with the exploit. I think these kids have exposed the true lack of security around the world in general and it has raised some serious attention for other people to take a look at their own defence, which is good in some respects. What they have also successfully done is lowered peoples trust in massive corporations which in turn is going to hurt the economy globally, which is not good in any respect. I think they should have hacked it then made the companies aware, not the whole world. It's hard enough getting someone to trust and pay for services from a company when they think they are safe, they really won't when there is no trust there at all.
- nakkiel 15y ago
  I have only one thing to say: if companies were taking the necessary steps to protect their customers and treat them as if they actually mattered there wouldn't be any problem. And I'll remind everybody that we are dealing with SQL injections and plain-text passwords. And it's 2011.
- atourgates 15y ago
  Am I misinterpreting your comment? You said, the hackers "lowered people's trust in massive corporations [...] which is not good in any respect." It seems pretty clear to me that Sony is most decidedly not deserving of consumer's trust - and without these public disclosures, we would have never known that. Certainly - as I learned in the Gawker security breach - it sucks to have your login details broadcasted to the rest of the internets. But, after a few hours restting passwords across the internet, I was good to go. I expect the affected consumers in this case will have a similar experience. And, that experience is a far better one than having your data stolen by a more malicious group of hackers, who use it for far more damaging means, without your knowledge. So, I don't believe that this group of hackers are any kind of heroic. But even if their motivation is suspect, I do believe they're performing a type of public service. Teaching us all that it's the height of ludicrous to hand over your sensitive data to Sony, and expect them to keep it reasonably secure from basic script-kiddie tactics.
  - calloc 15y ago
    Why are you using the same password across the web in the first place. Worst case at least have a tiered system. High - These are high security risk, such as email accounts, and anything that can gain access to or control something that relates to it (domain names, server access, stuff like that). Medium - Passwords that give you access to very specific systems that if someone gained access would ruin your day but won't allow them to do anything really bad (personal home file server, the password to your FTP, web forums where you have a trust based relationship with people) Low - If it gets hacked, who cares. Won't make a bit of difference (throwaway accounts on forums, news sites, stuff like that).
    - atourgates 15y ago
      You're absolutely right, but, like (I suspect) many people, I knew better, but hadn't taken the time to implement unique passwords before the Gawker security breach. It basically forced me to act - and now I'm better for it.
  - chrislomax 15y ago
    No, they might not be deserving of customers trust but that doesn't mean that throwing egg on their face is helping the situation any. If the hackers were doing it for the good of the community then it's counter productive. They should have informed Sony of the issue. They are kids who do not understand what effect the situation has on the economic climate. Also, defacing the other music sites does nothing more than raise the profile of their hacking "skills". As I mentioned, yes they are making people aware that there are security issues that companies need to iron out and Sony are having some serious bad media recently but who is this really helping? It's not helping the market and its not helping consumers? You and I both know that they should not be storing stuff plain text or with some bad security practice and we understand what it takes to make it right but to the common person they are instantly put off all places where they have to put card details. The overall perception of the web is stepping back 15 years in the eyes of the general consumer, soon people will be afraid to put their details anywhere. I agree completely with what you are saying but that's from my point of view, I'm thinking general consumer confidence.
ChuckMcM 15y ago
These guys are like the kids who paint your cat with spray paint. It seems with most groups, and computer criminals doesn't seem to have escaped, they have people who span the range from 'harmless' to 'lethal'. This prank (and it was a prank) was more in the 'harmless' side, Stuxnet was more on the 'lethal' side. Some people see the end of the internet as we know it in these stories, I see new opportunities to sell locks :-)

by newobj 15y ago

chrislomax 15y ago

You say you are glad they were doing it for fun and wait for someone to do it not for fun? How do you know it's not already been done? A true hacker wouldn't expose their actions and would continue with the exploit. I think these kids have exposed the true lack of security around the world in general and it has raised some serious attention for other people to take a look at their own defence, which is good in some respects. What they have also successfully done is lowered peoples trust in massive corporations which in turn is going to hurt the economy globally, which is not good in any respect. I think they should have hacked it then made the companies aware, not the whole world. It's hard enough getting someone to trust and pay for services from a company when they think they are safe, they really won't when there is no trust there at all.

nakkiel 15y ago
I have only one thing to say: if companies were taking the necessary steps to protect their customers and treat them as if they actually mattered there wouldn't be any problem. And I'll remind everybody that we are dealing with SQL injections and plain-text passwords. And it's 2011.
atourgates 15y ago
Am I misinterpreting your comment? You said, the hackers "lowered people's trust in massive corporations [...] which is not good in any respect." It seems pretty clear to me that Sony is most decidedly not deserving of consumer's trust - and without these public disclosures, we would have never known that. Certainly - as I learned in the Gawker security breach - it sucks to have your login details broadcasted to the rest of the internets. But, after a few hours restting passwords across the internet, I was good to go. I expect the affected consumers in this case will have a similar experience. And, that experience is a far better one than having your data stolen by a more malicious group of hackers, who use it for far more damaging means, without your knowledge. So, I don't believe that this group of hackers are any kind of heroic. But even if their motivation is suspect, I do believe they're performing a type of public service. Teaching us all that it's the height of ludicrous to hand over your sensitive data to Sony, and expect them to keep it reasonably secure from basic script-kiddie tactics.
- calloc 15y ago
  Why are you using the same password across the web in the first place. Worst case at least have a tiered system. High - These are high security risk, such as email accounts, and anything that can gain access to or control something that relates to it (domain names, server access, stuff like that). Medium - Passwords that give you access to very specific systems that if someone gained access would ruin your day but won't allow them to do anything really bad (personal home file server, the password to your FTP, web forums where you have a trust based relationship with people) Low - If it gets hacked, who cares. Won't make a bit of difference (throwaway accounts on forums, news sites, stuff like that).
  - atourgates 15y ago
    You're absolutely right, but, like (I suspect) many people, I knew better, but hadn't taken the time to implement unique passwords before the Gawker security breach. It basically forced me to act - and now I'm better for it.
- chrislomax 15y ago
  No, they might not be deserving of customers trust but that doesn't mean that throwing egg on their face is helping the situation any. If the hackers were doing it for the good of the community then it's counter productive. They should have informed Sony of the issue. They are kids who do not understand what effect the situation has on the economic climate. Also, defacing the other music sites does nothing more than raise the profile of their hacking "skills". As I mentioned, yes they are making people aware that there are security issues that companies need to iron out and Sony are having some serious bad media recently but who is this really helping? It's not helping the market and its not helping consumers? You and I both know that they should not be storing stuff plain text or with some bad security practice and we understand what it takes to make it right but to the common person they are instantly put off all places where they have to put card details. The overall perception of the web is stepping back 15 years in the eyes of the general consumer, soon people will be afraid to put their details anywhere. I agree completely with what you are saying but that's from my point of view, I'm thinking general consumer confidence.

ChuckMcM 15y ago

These guys are like the kids who paint your cat with spray paint. It seems with most groups, and computer criminals doesn't seem to have escaped, they have people who span the range from 'harmless' to 'lethal'. This prank (and it was a prank) was more in the 'harmless' side, Stuxnet was more on the 'lethal' side. Some people see the end of the internet as we know it in these stories, I see new opportunities to sell locks :-)