3 ms·
They should have definitely acknowledged they covered this before. But also to be fair, quoting the article the reputation damage was done: “Following the publi
by varenc 5y ago
They should have definitely acknowledged they covered this before. But also to be fair, quoting the article the reputation damage was done:
“Following the publication of these articles, between Tuesday, March 30, 2021 and Wednesday March 31”.
And the Krebs article was on April 4th. It seems BleepingComputer broke the story and Krebs just re-reported the news.
- zamadatix 5y ago> And the Krebs article was on April 4th. It seems BleepingComputer broke the story and Krebs just re-reported the news. Kreb's first article was on March 30 https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/03/whistleblower-ubiquiti-breach-catastrophic/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/03/whistleblower-ubiquiti-b... Kreb's second article was on April 4th https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/04/ubiquiti-all-but-confirms-breach-response-iniquity/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/04/ubiquiti-all-but-confirm... BleepingComputer's article didn't come out until the email from Ubiquiti on April 1 and quotes Kreb's article on March 30
- varenc 5y agoWhoops I stand corrected. Wish I could edit my old comment. Looks like Kreb's definitely talked to the guy now indicted in their March 30th article. That makes the complete lack of acknowledgement quite a bit more damning.