3 ms·
Honestly I’m surprised they admitted this. Historically companies and organizations would always blame whatever the current hacking buzzword is. I recall APT be
by olliej 5y ago
Honestly I’m surprised they admitted this. Historically companies and organizations would always blame whatever the current hacking buzzword is. I recall APT being an especially annoying example of this, until that buzzword disappeared and then suddenly everyone’s hackers stopped being APT.
- remram 5y agoYes usually reading from a completely-open Elasticsearch or S3 bucket is labeled "a hack". Good on them for admitting fault.
- musingsole 5y agoLikewise, I always thought that "we were hacked!" approach was an attempt to CYA in a legal respect. And the way the word gets used, it covers any usage of a service not explicitly allowed in the Terms of Service. But in this case, it seems they reviewed their terms and realized they hadn't protected themselves FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT No matter what ivory tower we're talking about, there's never a reason to be in awe of the top.
- codesections 5y ago> Honestly I’m surprised they admitted this. I think it's because they're lawyers. I have decidedly mixed feelings about the legal profession, but most lawyers (especially the "establishment" types most likely to be involved in the CA bar) are *very* unlikely to make deliberately false statements (or to fail to correct a past statement, one they learn it was false). In defiance of thousands of lawyer jokes, in my experience lawyers lie the *least* of any large group of humans I've encountered – at least if "lying" refers only to the specific denotation of the words, since lawyers also love to split hairs to say something that's technically true. But the distinction between a "hack" and a "database error" is _exactly_ the sort of hair that lawyers love to split! Source: I'm a lawyer-turned-programmer