5 ms·
"and if you say that they should have protected the information, you are blaming the victim because you don't like them?" If we only blamed Amazon in your exam
by paulhauggis 11y ago
"and if you say that they should have protected the information, you are blaming the victim because you don't like them?"
If we only blamed Amazon in your example, then yes, we would only be blaming the victim.
How do we know they were "careless"?? They could have been using all of the correct security precautions and still got the data stolen.
It could have been an employee that installed malware because they fell for a phishing attack. Should they also be brought up on charges?
If my HN account gets compromised, should PG get brought up on charges? After all, he was supposed to protect my data, right?
Why aren't we even discussing the hackers that stole the data? Is it because they are supported here on HN?
- ptaipale 11y agoThere is a fundamental difference between HN and the IRS (for Americans, and corresponding agencies of the government for people in other countries): using HN is completely voluntary. Giving your personal information in a tax return is mandatory and not complying is punished severely. In my opinion, this sets the required standard to a completely different class. The tax services have an important responsibility to process their information in a secure way. The information needs to be protected against leaks. And from the outcome we can see that the protections are not adequate.
- paulhauggis 11y ago"In my opinion, this sets the required standard to a completely different class. The tax services have an important responsibility to process their information in a secure way. The information needs to be protected against leaks." There is no way to protect leaks 100%. So you have unrealistic expectations.