4 ms·

It says Okta was "hit by" a breach, which it was. A breach happened, and Okta was impacted. Furthermore, it happened to data which Okta is ultimately responsibl

It says Okta was "hit by" a breach, which it was. A breach happened, and Okta was impacted. Furthermore, it happened to data which Okta is ultimately responsible for, and Okta should be held responsible for their choices which led to their employees' data being stolen. I'm not sure why you're splitting hairs on this.

ethbr1 3y ago
"another" is the weasel word It implies this breach is the same as the previous breach, which it's not. Ars has gone to shit over the last decade.
- arrakeenrevived 3y ago
  I don't think I agree that the use of the word "another" implies that the breaches were equal, but I can see why others might interpret it that way. I won't disagree with opinion on the quality of Ars' reporting or this particular article, but I do disagree with the original comment's statement that "this had nothing to do with Okta".
  - d3w4s9 3y ago
    Without knowing the context, I doubt anyone reading the title is thinking "maybe they mean another breach where Okta is impacted but Okta is not the culprit, despite recent events". No, the title is simply misleading. They could have swapped Okta for another company's name or something like "Personal information stolen in healthcare company breach", and the news likely wouldn't get much attention, which is as much as what the article is actually worth. Singling out Okta among many of that company's clients is simply meaningless and wrong and does nothing other than attention grabbing.
    - 3c6bYDXLMj 3y ago
      Immediately what I thought when I read it. The person you’re responding to is being obtuse to the point where it feels like trolling or contrarianism for the sake of contrarianism. Certainly a bad-faith argument.
- ryanisnan 3y ago
  > but I do disagree with the original comment's statement that "this had nothing to do with Okta". I could have probably phrased this as "this had nothing to do with Okta's technology."
d3w4s9 3y ago
Because context and sentiment matters. By your logic clickbait is perfectly fine and we should maybe do more because they are (usually) technically correct.
- BeefWellington 3y ago
  Just continue reading the title all the way to the end? I know it's a long haul but come on, we can't just stop at the first bit of punctuation: > Okta hit by another breach, this one stealing employee data from 3rd-party vendor It's clear a breach has affected Okta employees.

ethbr1 3y ago

"another" is the weasel word It implies this breach is the same as the previous breach, which it's not. Ars has gone to shit over the last decade.

arrakeenrevived 3y ago
I don't think I agree that the use of the word "another" implies that the breaches were equal, but I can see why others might interpret it that way. I won't disagree with opinion on the quality of Ars' reporting or this particular article, but I do disagree with the original comment's statement that "this had nothing to do with Okta".
- d3w4s9 3y ago
  Without knowing the context, I doubt anyone reading the title is thinking "maybe they mean another breach where Okta is impacted but Okta is not the culprit, despite recent events". No, the title is simply misleading. They could have swapped Okta for another company's name or something like "Personal information stolen in healthcare company breach", and the news likely wouldn't get much attention, which is as much as what the article is actually worth. Singling out Okta among many of that company's clients is simply meaningless and wrong and does nothing other than attention grabbing.
  - 3c6bYDXLMj 3y ago
    Immediately what I thought when I read it. The person you’re responding to is being obtuse to the point where it feels like trolling or contrarianism for the sake of contrarianism. Certainly a bad-faith argument.
ryanisnan 3y ago
> but I do disagree with the original comment's statement that "this had nothing to do with Okta". I could have probably phrased this as "this had nothing to do with Okta's technology."

d3w4s9 3y ago

Because context and sentiment matters. By your logic clickbait is perfectly fine and we should maybe do more because they are (usually) technically correct.

BeefWellington 3y ago
Just continue reading the title all the way to the end? I know it's a long haul but come on, we can't just stop at the first bit of punctuation: > Okta hit by another breach, this one stealing employee data from 3rd-party vendor It's clear a breach has affected Okta employees.