4 ms·
>Although the trend of many data breaches certainly wouldn't decline in that case. Exactly. Successful and profitable are not mutually exclusive with "secure"
by rudolf0 12y ago
>Although the trend of many data breaches certainly wouldn't decline in that case.
Exactly. Successful and profitable are not mutually exclusive with "secure" or "well-architected". At least until those last two come to bite you later and start eating into your profits.
- Lord_Zero 12y agoSony is a great example of this.
- jjoonathan 12y agoDid the PR hit actually translate into a monetary hit and eat into their profits?
- thaumaturgy 12y agoI don't know about the cost of the negative PR, but the compromise itself cost them $15 million in real costs (http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-sony-hack-cost-20150204-story.html http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-c...) and potentially much more (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/09/us-sony-cybersecurity-costs-idUSKBN0JN2L020141209 http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/09/us-sony-cybersecur...) once you count the downtime involved and potential lawsuits, settlements, and other fallout over the breach of information. IIRC there were some embarrassing emails released regarding some Hollywood big-wigs, for example. It should be a huge cautionary tale for any big organization that doesn't have good internal security, but unfortunately this isn't the first such case in history, and it almost certainly won't be the last. But that doesn't mean there aren't other smart businesses out there.
- _yosefk 12y ago$15M sounds like a rounding error for Sony. It sounds like a rounding error as well when compared to the cost of brand-name IT solutions when deployed in a company of Sony's size.