4 ms·
I assume rockstar didn't pay, so they leaked the source code. Not sure why anything would be delayed because of this.
by BoardsOfCanada 3y ago
I assume rockstar didn't pay, so they leaked the source code. Not sure why anything would be delayed because of this.
- ashupadhi01 3y agoPay whom. Just explain me in brief how this leaking scene works.
- endianswap 3y agoransomware
- Maxious 3y agoThere was an infamous ransomware attack. One of the hackers was convicted this week hence the timing of the leak https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-67663128 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-67663128
- Crosseye_Jack 3y ago1) Entity gets hacked 2) Hackers exfiltrate data from the target (this could be source code, database dumps, employee records, emails, or any combination of the above - basically anything that could be seen that has value to the company staying private. 3) Depending on the model used, the hackers either privately or publicly informs entity they have their data and unless a payment of X if made the data will get leaked or sold to the highest bidder.
- andersa 3y agoI don't understand how anyone would ever pay. There is nothing guaranteeing you the hackers actually destroy their copy of the data on payment, so they could just come back and ask you for another payment every few months. Or are we really supposed to believe these criminals would follow some sort of made up honor code?
- xvector 3y agoTheir business model wouldn't work if they did a double random. It's not an honor code but a common sense code.
- google234123 3y agoWhich is why it should be illegal to pay them off
- shric 3y agoThey have an incentive to uphold their end, otherwise they will never be able to extort someone else in the future.
- andersa 3y agoAren't they all anonymous, though? So they could just change their name for the next operation. Maybe all these groups are already the same people behind the scenes.
- addaon 3y agoYou're missing the incentives. They /could/ change their name each operation, but then, as you note, the target would have reduced motivation to actually pay. By keeping their name, and keeping their word, customers are more likely to pay in the future, because there's a history of good faith transactions. And, of course, a group that is relying on their reputation like this must police their trademark and prevent other groups from abusing it.
- dehrmann 3y agoWhy would they pay? It's a 10-year-old game that's the second best selling game of all time. Rockstar made their money, and there isn't anything a competitor could use to gain an advantage. It's almost good because it's free press for GTA VI.
- getwiththeprog 3y agoFree advertising, very well timed indeed.
- serf 3y agosource leaks damage things aside from profitability. this will just serve as yet another feather in the cap for the exploit/hacking/modding community; and a lot of THOSE people make cash by selling exploits. If rockstar cared about cheating ( they don't ) this would throw a big monkey wrench into that effort, obfuscation is half the battle in a game where book-keeping like an MMO would be performance prohibitive.
- dns_snek 3y agoIf they cared about their customers they would pay to stop them (us) getting pwned with numerous 0-day vulnerabilities that no doubt exist in a 15 year old code base that had never seen the light of day.
- MikusR 3y ago1. The game still sells 10+ million copies a year. 2. GTA online brings at least half a billion a year in microtransactions.