Bioware Hacked

[JET1971]

Its not the hackers' faults. Security updates for server software costs money. So they take the easy way out by not securing it properly.

analogy: If a bank decided to not upgrade its vault with paper walls to metal walls and some thief came by and stole all your savings..... would you really blame the thief as much as the banking company?

Companies should just delete account data that they dont plan on using anymore once they stop supporting the games.

If this keeps up, I see two possible outcomes:
paid internet security that leaves room for privacy goes up
or
pair internet security that does not leave room for privacy goes up (the easy way out for security firms... yet it would cause protests... I hope)

Actually, it is the fault of the hackers. When somebody gets attacked, it's always the perpetrator's fault first and foremost and not the victim's. This is always true no matter what the circumstances.

The company that does not properly secure customers information and make it as difficult as possible to get to is also at fault. the only real victims are the customers of those companies and not the companies themselves. Doing business on the internet has many benifits and security risks. when a company chooses to do business on the internet they are responsible for maintaining a certain reasonable level of security, such as customers personal information being kept on the most secure server within its network, if they have it on the same server as the company website then they did not maintain a reasonable amount of security, and furthermore if they did not encrypt any of it and the information is leaked out... The company is at fault for not protecting your information. If a bank does not lock the vault at night and the alarm system is broken, if all the money is stolen then it is the banks fault for not securing it, same thing applies to the internet.

Both a bank alarm and vault can be breached, any server connected to the internet can be breached. Alarm is broken and vault not locked is the same amount of security as the servers are not properly updated, personal information of customers is not encrypted and stored on the same server as the website or on another server that has complete open access to the webserver. If my personal information is on a server with that level of security and it gets leaked.. you bet your ass I will be blaming the company! If the server security was done properly with servers fully updated, personal information on another server other than the website with limited access and encrypted that gets hacked. well it was properly secured and I cannot blame the company.

 

[A1]

Its not the hackers' faults. Security updates for server software costs money. So they take the easy way out by not securing it properly.

analogy: If a bank decided to not upgrade its vault with paper walls to metal walls and some thief came by and stole all your savings..... would you really blame the thief as much as the banking company?

Companies should just delete account data that they dont plan on using anymore once they stop supporting the games.

If this keeps up, I see two possible outcomes:
paid internet security that leaves room for privacy goes up
or
pair internet security that does not leave room for privacy goes up (the easy way out for security firms... yet it would cause protests... I hope)

Actually, it is the fault of the hackers. When somebody gets attacked, it's always the perpetrator's fault first and foremost and not the victim's. This is always true no matter what the circumstances.

The company that does not properly secure customers information and make it as difficult as possible to get to is also at fault. the only real victims are the customers of those companies and not the companies themselves. Doing business on the internet has many benifits and security risks. when a company chooses to do business on the internet they are responsible for maintaining a certain reasonable level of security, such as customers personal information being kept on the most secure server within its network, if they have it on the same server as the company website then they did not maintain a reasonable amount of security, and furthermore if they did not encrypt any of it and the information is leaked out... The company is at fault for not protecting your information. If a bank does not lock the vault at night and the alarm system is broken, if all the money is stolen then it is the banks fault for not securing it, same thing applies to the internet.

Both a bank alarm and vault can be breached, any server connected to the internet can be breached. Alarm is broken and vault not locked is the same amount of security as the servers are not properly updated, personal information of customers is not encrypted and stored on the same server as the website or on another server that has complete open access to the webserver. If my personal information is on a server with that level of security and it gets leaked.. you bet your ass I will be blaming the company! If the server security was done properly with servers fully updated, personal information on another server other than the website with limited access and encrypted that gets hacked. well it was properly secured and I cannot blame the company.

Actually the companies and governments that get attacked are also victims in addition to all the customers, associates, and citizens. They get publicly embarrassed and lose money when such things happen. They also get harmed and that by the way is also bad for the customers, associates, and citizens. You may not like the victim and you may argue that the victim deserved to be attacked. But a victim is still a victim. And when someone gets attacked it's always the perpetrators fault first and foremost and not the victims, no matter what the circumstances. Sure maybe the victim could have been better prepared, but that doesn't matter because it's still the perpetrators fault, no matter what the circumstances.

 

[phelan511]

So when well those extra credit guys make another video talking about how great those hackers are....?

I don't recall them defending Lulzsec. They did sorta defend Anonymous, but it was more of the fact that Anonymous straight up said it wasn't them. As proof, 4chan got DDoS'd for a bit yesterday. Not sure by who but my money's on Lulzsec

Chances are it was Lulz, they tweeted about /b/ 'hunting' them.

Eh. Figured. Although to be completely honest if Anon wanted to get rid of them I'm pretty sure they would "let slip" some location data of Lulzsecs servers. I'm kinda thinking Anon just really doesn't give a flying fuck about them and is just waiting for Lulzsec to slip up and get themselves caught.

 

[Ilikemilkshake]

So when well those extra credit guys make another video talking about how great those hackers are....?

I don't recall them defending Lulzsec. They did sorta defend Anonymous, but it was more of the fact that Anonymous straight up said it wasn't them. As proof, 4chan got DDoS'd for a bit yesterday. Not sure by who but my money's on Lulzsec

Chances are it was Lulz, they tweeted about /b/ 'hunting' them.

Eh. Figured. Although to be completely honest if Anon wanted to get rid of them I'm pretty sure they would "let slip" some location data of Lulzsecs servers. I'm kinda thinking Anon just really doesn't give a flying fuck about them and is just waiting for Lulzsec to slip up and get themselves caught.

lulzsec arent really keeping a low profile.. they have a twitter account amoungst other things, anon has tracked people down with way less info than that.. so im surprised it hasnt happened already.. especially seeing as 4chan has been ddos'd