3 ms·
I do that that the media that breathlessly amplified this persons attack should learn from it. In particular, As much as I like and appreciate his reporting, Br
by InTheArena 5y ago
I do that that the media that breathlessly amplified this persons attack should learn from it. In particular, As much as I like and appreciate his reporting, Brian Krebs was the key person amplifying this message - which makes him a unwitting accomplice to many billions of dollars of damage to ubiquiti shareholders.
Responsible disclosure exists for a reason.
- sneak 5y agoBrian Krebs isn't a good reporter or a good person. He has a history of doxxing people without basis (or for the basis of leaving bad reviews on his books). It disappoints me that he has the audience he does.
- BeefWellington 5y agoThis provides an excellent case study as well, as his original post on this doesn't seem to produce any corroboration at all, so the "reporting" boils down to: "I got an e-mail from someone making a bunch of claims, so I'll regurgitate those." Including an update/follow-up that was added later, by the same person. At best, it's shoddy journalism. He was taken for a ride and should bear some public shame for that. I doubt he'll get sued for it but a lot of people lost money because of him, so I wouldn't be surprised if someone tried.
- stef25 5y agoSource?
- tptacek 5y agoHe's a reporter. "Doxxing" isn't a thing in journalism, even though it upsets people on message boards to hear it.
- InTheArena 5y agodoxxing is doxxing. Don't care if the media think they are special.
- tptacek 5y agoYou're just wrong. The rest of the world does not play by Reddit rules. In a very real sense, "doxxing" is literally the core job of journalism.
- tptacek 5y agoWhat's really unproven here is the idea that Ubiquiti lost billion of dollars in stock value over these messages. Seems pretty unlikely.
- InTheArena 5y agoThe stock definitely was at a peak, and fell dramatically on the release of that news and stayed low. That part is absolutely correct. Now you can argue that it wasn't a permanent loss, but the damage was done by the hacker and the journalist. It has also stayed relatively in that range afterwards - but you can definitely argue that this is due to the supply chain problems that the entire world is dealing with - but it's a pretty straight line to say that billions in shareholder value were wiped out.
- tptacek 5y agoCorrelation isn't causation, especially with stock prices.
- InTheArena 5y agoOh I don't know. news coming out / leaking about a massive data breach, and the stock dropping off it's high _the very same freaking day_ seems like causation, not correlation. But whatever.
- tptacek 5y agoStocks drop for all sorts of reasons, and stuff like breach notifications are routinely swamped by other (often macro) causes. But nerds love to believe that security stories have powerful impacts on stocks, despite the fact that the most successful companies routinely experience them.