4 ms·

This makes Symantec look a lot worse than "Anonymous" IMO. Symantec is supposedly a reputable computer software company. The fact that they have to resort to

This makes Symantec look a lot worse than "Anonymous" IMO. Symantec is supposedly a reputable computer software company. The fact that they have to resort to legal means to secure their own source code is not a positive indication that they do a good job.

alexholehouse 15y ago
So you'd prefer illegal means? I'm not sure I understand your comment.
- maximveksler 15y ago
  No, I believe he refers to technical means. Meaning being able to prevent the leak.
  - alexholehouse 15y ago
    Right, so that's what I originally thought, but they are two separate problems. Yes, of course it would be ideal to prevent the leak in the first place - being a security company and having your sourcecode stolen is not exactly ideal, nor does it reflect very well on your ability to achieve the express purpose of your company. HOWEVER, what's done is done, and given this source code has been stolen, I would on balance prefer Symantec to retrieve the code/neutralize the threat through legal means, rather than acting as "hax0rz" themselves. Whether or not this approach will work is a third debate - you'd hope this was, as suggested, a ploy by law enforcement working with Symantec, but I feel like it would reflect far worse on the company if they took an underhand approach to the situation. It's damage limitation at this point, and for a company so integrated with non-tech companies and individuals a legal approach seems a far more sensible option.
chollida1 15y ago
> The fact that they have to resort to legal means to secure their own source code is not a positive indication that they do a good job. Really? So if I, a supposedly reputable citizen have to resort to calling the police after my house is broken into that reflects poorly on me? Symantec may have doen things that reflect poorly on them, but I don't think calling the police in is one of them. That's what you are supposed to do. Remember that pretty much every tech company has had some of their code broken into, whether it's microsoft's OS, to Google's Chinese gmail back doors to oracle's db leak.
- freehunter 15y ago
  >So if I, a supposedly reputable citizen have to resort to calling the police after my house is broken into that reflects poorly on me? No, if you as the CEO of ADT had to call the police after a home break-in, that would reflect poorly on you. Symantec is not a "reputable citizen", they're a security vendor. It's not the fact that they called the police, it's the fact that calling the police was necessary at all.
  - chollida1 15y ago
    > No, if you as the CEO of ADT had to call the police after a home break-in Really? That's a really silly point of view. Break ins happen at the most secure places, and a police report is required to collect any insurance. Calling the police is not only the smart thing to do, it's also the right thing to do.
jrockway 15y ago
What can they do? All it takes is one employee and a flash drive to leak the source code anonymously. Considering the value of a 0-day exploit on the open market, I'm sure that an interested party could find some low-level junior developer to bribe to steal the source code. And here we are today.
- lawnchair_larry 15y ago
  But that isn't what happened. They were owned, multiple times, and have admitted that this was stolen during a hacking incident that they didn't investigate previously.

alexholehouse 15y ago

So you'd prefer illegal means? I'm not sure I understand your comment.

maximveksler 15y ago
No, I believe he refers to technical means. Meaning being able to prevent the leak.
- alexholehouse 15y ago
  Right, so that's what I originally thought, but they are two separate problems. Yes, of course it would be ideal to prevent the leak in the first place - being a security company and having your sourcecode stolen is not exactly ideal, nor does it reflect very well on your ability to achieve the express purpose of your company. HOWEVER, what's done is done, and given this source code has been stolen, I would on balance prefer Symantec to retrieve the code/neutralize the threat through legal means, rather than acting as "hax0rz" themselves. Whether or not this approach will work is a third debate - you'd hope this was, as suggested, a ploy by law enforcement working with Symantec, but I feel like it would reflect far worse on the company if they took an underhand approach to the situation. It's damage limitation at this point, and for a company so integrated with non-tech companies and individuals a legal approach seems a far more sensible option.

chollida1 15y ago

> The fact that they have to resort to legal means to secure their own source code is not a positive indication that they do a good job. Really? So if I, a supposedly reputable citizen have to resort to calling the police after my house is broken into that reflects poorly on me? Symantec may have doen things that reflect poorly on them, but I don't think calling the police in is one of them. That's what you are supposed to do. Remember that pretty much every tech company has had some of their code broken into, whether it's microsoft's OS, to Google's Chinese gmail back doors to oracle's db leak.

freehunter 15y ago
>So if I, a supposedly reputable citizen have to resort to calling the police after my house is broken into that reflects poorly on me? No, if you as the CEO of ADT had to call the police after a home break-in, that would reflect poorly on you. Symantec is not a "reputable citizen", they're a security vendor. It's not the fact that they called the police, it's the fact that calling the police was necessary at all.
- chollida1 15y ago
  > No, if you as the CEO of ADT had to call the police after a home break-in Really? That's a really silly point of view. Break ins happen at the most secure places, and a police report is required to collect any insurance. Calling the police is not only the smart thing to do, it's also the right thing to do.

jrockway 15y ago

What can they do? All it takes is one employee and a flash drive to leak the source code anonymously. Considering the value of a 0-day exploit on the open market, I'm sure that an interested party could find some low-level junior developer to bribe to steal the source code. And here we are today.

lawnchair_larry 15y ago
But that isn't what happened. They were owned, multiple times, and have admitted that this was stolen during a hacking incident that they didn't investigate previously.