4 ms·
Absolutely. They are guilty of writing vulnerable code, being hacked, and stolen from.
by DangitBobby 4y ago
Absolutely. They are guilty of writing vulnerable code, being hacked, and stolen from.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- trasz 4y agoThey are guilty of implementing a mechanism that was broken by design, and wasting customers' money. They hadn't been hacked or stolen from - the "attacker" didn't need to hack any particular security mechanism, he was just smarter at how their market worked than the owners.
- Handytinge 4y agoIf _they_ are not treating it as seriously as actual regulated finance, why should the courts be treating the attacker in that way?