4 ms·
Sadly, exploitation is often much easier than protection. They only need to find one hole - the defender must secure everything. Oh, and it's probably not goo
by someone13 15y ago
Sadly, exploitation is often much easier than protection. They only need to find one hole - the defender must secure everything.
Oh, and it's probably not good to encourage this kind of thing either.
- ZeSmith 15y agoYeah, "defender's advantage" does not apply in the wacky world of computer security.
- lawnchair_larry 15y agoBut it's worse to hide and ignore the problem. The other poster hit the nail on the head. This stuff is happening on a much larger scale - it's only because of lulzsec/anonymous that anyone even has a clue how bad the situation really is.
- killerswan 15y agoDue to the anonymous nature of these things, some of these recent attacks could easily be from within the USA's govt, just like the anthrax letters were. It does seem clear, though, that we all have a lot to learn about protecting information...
- someone13 15y agoActually, I don't disagree with you - it's a good thing (for a certain value of "good" - in a perfect world, things would all be secure, and we'd ride unicorns everywhere) that this kind of stuff is exposed. What I disagree with is the "giving them a job" bit. I don't think that rewarding these kinds of people with employment is right - part of working in computer security is having a certain code of ethics. Whereas I'd much prefer that this kind of stuff be made public, giving them a job is similar to rewarding a thief with a job as a cop. People are free to disagree, of course :P
- diogenescynic 15y agoI'm not encouraging the act, I'm just saying the companies should respond pro-actively not just pretend the problem(s) don't exist. Doing nothing is the absolute worst option.