3 ms·
>No company can avoid being hacked. 100% with you on this. Sec has to get it right, every. single. time. and that's not realistic. No one gets it right every s
by sonicanatidae 3y ago
>No company can avoid being hacked.
100% with you on this. Sec has to get it right, every. single. time. and that's not realistic. No one gets it right every single time. I'm not even getting into 0day and similar.
However, companies that are callous with your data and their own sec, like Equifax was, should suffer more than the current fine of a nickel, then it's on to BONUSES, with no other repercussions.
Lastly, according to the horrifically bad CU ruling, corps are practically humans, in every sense that gains them an advantage, but somehow magically immune in situations where they might find the slightest difficulty.
- josefritz 3y agoTrue. However, their abdication of responsibility is indicative of a lack of a security culture. It's hard to say that they were more or less negligent than Equifax, but both data sets should have been Highly secure. It's also interesting that outside of the US their lack of security would open them to criminal liabilities under GDPR.
- sonicanatidae 3y agoEquifax was more negligent. No doubt. EQ left default credentials intact on a public facing database. 23 was cred stuffed, which is still not good, but not the same level of negligence. US laws are a sad tragedy of the rich fucking the not rich harder and harder and harder every decade.