3 ms·

Given what the article says, this seems like a bit of fearmongering on ABC's part.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
matai_kolila 4y ago
Agreed, this is a terrible headline designed exclusively for clicks. > "It's an inconvenience," the source said. How wildly irresponsible of the editor who came up with this headline. > Jamming attacks like the one seen Monday morning are highly visible but largely superficial and often temporary Gee, I wonder why these superficial attacks are so visible, ABC...
- atourgates 4y ago
  As far as "airport-travel related systems that could be affected without seriously impacting anyone's travel", "airport websites" are the top of the list. I think the last time I used one, it was to find out if there was an airport lounge in a specific terminal. "Airport Websites Briefly Unavailable" is a much less exciting, but much more accurate headline.
mindslight 4y ago
Every article about "cyber" is fundamentally fearmongering, because they incorrectly analogize to the physical world where security is outsourced to an ambient third party (post facto law enforcement), implying an attacker is the purely responsible party. In digital reality, this headline would be more appropriate as "Airline website insecurities taken advantage of by Russia to disrupt business". The focus should be on the irresponsible duct-tape-and-string operations these businesses are running, rather than the people half a world a way sweet talking the computers into misbehaving.
- CompuHacker 4y ago
  "... taken advantage of by an entity capable of causing Russian computers to convince U.S. computers to misbehave, or to convincingly mis-attribute that activity in at least the preliminary stages of an investigation."
tcmb 4y ago
Or they just don't understand the difference between a DDoS on a website and an actual, effective cyberattack on an airport. Never assume malice etc
- humanistbot 4y ago
  Sure, it could be either malice or ignorance. But when there is a strong incentive to misrepresent this (views, ads), they lose the benefit of the doubt. Plus, if it is ignorance, then they have no business reporting on cyberattacks.
- chiefalchemist 4y ago
  They might not. But if they want to earn the title of journalist then they should find out. Ignorance or negligence is not a valid excuse. In short, there's no excuse for this from a source that has this level of impact.
- Dudeman112 4y ago
  >Never assume malice etc The assumption isn't "malice", it's "profit"
- bee_rider 4y ago
  Journalism is a profession, not a gig, the practitioners have a professional responsibility to be able to report on their topic. Representing yourself as a professional while being ignorant is malice.
  - kortilla 4y ago
    No, that’s not how malice works. >Representing yourself as a professional while being ignorant is malice. Being a professional just means you make a living doing it so you’re good enough to get paid. Nothing more, nothing less.
    - bee_rider 4y ago
      Suppose that's why expressions like "the work was very professionally done" tell us nothing about the quality of the work, and professional societies are just clubs of random people that meet down at the pub.
godelski 4y ago
There's some irony that this is right after John Oliver did a whole episode on media fear mongering and the result of which is people thinking crime is increasing and their safety is decreasing.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

Agreed, this is a terrible headline designed exclusively for clicks. > "It's an inconvenience," the source said. How wildly irresponsible of the editor who came up with this headline. > Jamming attacks like the one seen Monday morning are highly visible but largely superficial and often temporary Gee, I wonder why these superficial attacks are so visible, ABC...

atourgates 4y ago
As far as "airport-travel related systems that could be affected without seriously impacting anyone's travel", "airport websites" are the top of the list. I think the last time I used one, it was to find out if there was an airport lounge in a specific terminal. "Airport Websites Briefly Unavailable" is a much less exciting, but much more accurate headline.

mindslight 4y ago

Every article about "cyber" is fundamentally fearmongering, because they incorrectly analogize to the physical world where security is outsourced to an ambient third party (post facto law enforcement), implying an attacker is the purely responsible party. In digital reality, this headline would be more appropriate as "Airline website insecurities taken advantage of by Russia to disrupt business". The focus should be on the irresponsible duct-tape-and-string operations these businesses are running, rather than the people half a world a way sweet talking the computers into misbehaving.

CompuHacker 4y ago
"... taken advantage of by an entity capable of causing Russian computers to convince U.S. computers to misbehave, or to convincingly mis-attribute that activity in at least the preliminary stages of an investigation."

tcmb 4y ago

Or they just don't understand the difference between a DDoS on a website and an actual, effective cyberattack on an airport. Never assume malice etc

humanistbot 4y ago
Sure, it could be either malice or ignorance. But when there is a strong incentive to misrepresent this (views, ads), they lose the benefit of the doubt. Plus, if it is ignorance, then they have no business reporting on cyberattacks.
chiefalchemist 4y ago
They might not. But if they want to earn the title of journalist then they should find out. Ignorance or negligence is not a valid excuse. In short, there's no excuse for this from a source that has this level of impact.
Dudeman112 4y ago
>Never assume malice etc The assumption isn't "malice", it's "profit"
bee_rider 4y ago
Journalism is a profession, not a gig, the practitioners have a professional responsibility to be able to report on their topic. Representing yourself as a professional while being ignorant is malice.
- kortilla 4y ago
  No, that’s not how malice works. >Representing yourself as a professional while being ignorant is malice. Being a professional just means you make a living doing it so you’re good enough to get paid. Nothing more, nothing less.
  - bee_rider 4y ago
    Suppose that's why expressions like "the work was very professionally done" tell us nothing about the quality of the work, and professional societies are just clubs of random people that meet down at the pub.

godelski 4y ago

There's some irony that this is right after John Oliver did a whole episode on media fear mongering and the result of which is people thinking crime is increasing and their safety is decreasing.