5 ms·

Why would they spend money on that? This severe vulnerability isn't going to hurt their bottom line, even if it "should". (I'm not endorsing this perspective,

Why would they spend money on that? This severe vulnerability isn't going to hurt their bottom line, even if it "should". (I'm not endorsing this perspective, to be clear, just recognizing that it exists.)

User23 4y ago
Indeed. Everyone says that they care about online security, but revealed preferences show that virtually nobody actually does. On the other hand revealed preferences tell a completely different story about physical security.
ticviking 4y ago
Isn't doing that math and seeing how heartless corporations the opening premise of "Fight Club"?
- spookthesunset 4y ago
  If Fight Club was filmed today, I’m pretty sure the final scenes would be blowing up the media buildings and not the banks/credit card buildings…
  - Retric 4y ago
    As in Twitter/Facebook/Google or CNN/Fox News?
philsnow 4y ago
> This severe vulnerability isn't going to hurt their bottom line, even if it "should". When there's damnable, devastating security news for some publicly-traded company that makes it to the big news sources, the stock takes a 0-10% dive and then completely recovers within a couple weeks. Even if the company's response is completely bungled, mismanaged, or miscommunicated, the market doesn't understand security issues and it seems like the company just benefits from the news exposure. I wish I kept notes on the last few times I've seen this happen so that I could cite examples.
- mughinn 4y ago
  It's not the market, the customers don't care. They won't stop buying the product because of security issues, it's because of THAT that the price recovers, not because "the market" doesn't understand security If the customers cared, there would be significant drop in the price of the stock because a vulnerability like this would result in lower sales
  - kube-system 4y ago
    Well, some traders are selling on the news, which is what causes the dip. Most investors don't really have a deep technical grasp of the situation and don't fully realize how common software vulns are, don't understand their impact, or don't understand the effort to remediate them.
- hamburglar 4y ago
  I scooped up a bunch of SolarWinds stock on this theory but just barely made my money back a year later, and wouldn't have if I'd held it until now...
kahrl 4y ago
Idiotic claim with no proof. SiriusXM is a publicly traded company. If they were found responsible for vulnerabilities that lead to stolen cars, the lawsuits and public sentiment ABSOLUTELY would affect their bottom line. Just look at Kia and Hyundai right now. What are you even talking about?
- sofixa 4y ago
  Wouldn't the same argument apply to Equifax?
  - ethbr0 4y ago
    Equifax's customers aren't about to stop buying Equifax products because they leaked a bunch of PII.
  - kahrl 4y ago
    NO IT WOULD NOT. One business is dependent on their media image to sell cars, one business would rather you forget they exist because they are selling your identity to third parties. WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

User23 4y ago

Indeed. Everyone says that they care about online security, but revealed preferences show that virtually nobody actually does. On the other hand revealed preferences tell a completely different story about physical security.

ticviking 4y ago

Isn't doing that math and seeing how heartless corporations the opening premise of "Fight Club"?

spookthesunset 4y ago
If Fight Club was filmed today, I’m pretty sure the final scenes would be blowing up the media buildings and not the banks/credit card buildings…
- Retric 4y ago
  As in Twitter/Facebook/Google or CNN/Fox News?

philsnow 4y ago

> This severe vulnerability isn't going to hurt their bottom line, even if it "should". When there's damnable, devastating security news for some publicly-traded company that makes it to the big news sources, the stock takes a 0-10% dive and then completely recovers within a couple weeks. Even if the company's response is completely bungled, mismanaged, or miscommunicated, the market doesn't understand security issues and it seems like the company just benefits from the news exposure. I wish I kept notes on the last few times I've seen this happen so that I could cite examples.

mughinn 4y ago
It's not the market, the customers don't care. They won't stop buying the product because of security issues, it's because of THAT that the price recovers, not because "the market" doesn't understand security If the customers cared, there would be significant drop in the price of the stock because a vulnerability like this would result in lower sales
- kube-system 4y ago
  Well, some traders are selling on the news, which is what causes the dip. Most investors don't really have a deep technical grasp of the situation and don't fully realize how common software vulns are, don't understand their impact, or don't understand the effort to remediate them.
hamburglar 4y ago
I scooped up a bunch of SolarWinds stock on this theory but just barely made my money back a year later, and wouldn't have if I'd held it until now...

kahrl 4y ago

Idiotic claim with no proof. SiriusXM is a publicly traded company. If they were found responsible for vulnerabilities that lead to stolen cars, the lawsuits and public sentiment ABSOLUTELY would affect their bottom line. Just look at Kia and Hyundai right now. What are you even talking about?

sofixa 4y ago
Wouldn't the same argument apply to Equifax?
- ethbr0 4y ago
  Equifax's customers aren't about to stop buying Equifax products because they leaked a bunch of PII.
- kahrl 4y ago
  NO IT WOULD NOT. One business is dependent on their media image to sell cars, one business would rather you forget they exist because they are selling your identity to third parties. WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?