3 ms·

A domain name that is being used exclusively to address to data breach, and was registered within the past 2 months. And it's just a coincidence? Seems very u

by jnbiche 12y ago

A domain name that is being used exclusively to address to data breach, and was registered within the past 2 months. And it's just a coincidence? Seems very unlikely. And I'm sure they're quarantining negative info on an unrelated domain, but why would they even need to consider repurposing an existing domain name, instead of buying one? We're not talking about somebody doing a side project and hoping to save a few bucks by repurposing another domain name. And it takes all of a few hours to buy a domain name and have it propogate.

joekrill 12y ago
What's unlikely about it? Maybe if the domain name was "anthemdatabreachinfo.com" or something more specific, but "anthemfacts.com"? Many companies register lots of variation of domain names that they aren't using. I don't think it's unlikely at all that this came up, and there was a meeting where they said "OK, do we have any existing domain names we can use for this?"
- christop 12y ago
  So what have they been using the domain for in the few weeks since registration? The domain doesn't appear in web.archive.org until today, and searching Google for the domain between December and the end of January shows nothing. The website itself says "we have created a dedicated website ... anthemfacts.com" for this incident. [Edit: replaced two egregious uses of "website" with "domain"]
  - andyjohnson0 12y ago
    website != domain
andyjohnson0 12y ago
"A domain name that is being used exclusively to address to data breach..." My point is that while it is used for that purpose now, that doesn't mean that it was registered for that purpose back in mid-December. Your theory about the breach occurring earlier and being concealed until now is certainly possible, but the domain registration date on its own is not supporting evidence.
rmc 12y ago
It's a generic domain related to their brand. I'm sure they have thousands of domains.

by jnbiche 12y ago

joekrill 12y ago

What's unlikely about it? Maybe if the domain name was "anthemdatabreachinfo.com" or something more specific, but "anthemfacts.com"? Many companies register lots of variation of domain names that they aren't using. I don't think it's unlikely at all that this came up, and there was a meeting where they said "OK, do we have any existing domain names we can use for this?"

christop 12y ago
So what have they been using the domain for in the few weeks since registration? The domain doesn't appear in web.archive.org until today, and searching Google for the domain between December and the end of January shows nothing. The website itself says "we have created a dedicated website ... anthemfacts.com" for this incident. [Edit: replaced two egregious uses of "website" with "domain"]
- andyjohnson0 12y ago
  website != domain

andyjohnson0 12y ago

"A domain name that is being used exclusively to address to data breach..." My point is that while it is used for that purpose now, that doesn't mean that it was registered for that purpose back in mid-December. Your theory about the breach occurring earlier and being concealed until now is certainly possible, but the domain registration date on its own is not supporting evidence.

rmc 12y ago

It's a generic domain related to their brand. I'm sure they have thousands of domains.