I think it's more in the line of:Johnson McGee said:'You're Welcome'
They certainly have quite the god complex to say that just because they didn't do all the harm they could have.
I may not be a hacker, but I don't use my, say, chemistry knowledge to synthesize nitroglycerin and then demand people thank me for not throwing it at their houses.
Their motive was to tell other hackers that have discovered weaknesses with Brink that Lulzsec is the king of the sea. Admittedly, it is. Anonymous may be a contender but they're more or less a band of internet rebels rather than internet pirates as Lulzsec attributes themselves to. Basically, they want to make sure everyone knows that their boat is bigger than everyone elses.WaaghPowa said:And so they proceed to hack their system. This would seem counter productive, right?Andy Chalk said:We actually like this company and would like for them to speed up the production of Skyrim
The point I was trying to make was that everyone is better at something, and that being good at hacking doesn't give them a license to lord it over everyone else and flaunt the law.Firetaffer said:I think it's more in the line of:Johnson McGee said:I may not be a hacker, but I don't use my, say, chemistry knowledge to synthesize nitroglycerin and then demand people thank me for not throwing it at their houses.
You synthesize nitroglycerin, throw it through someone's house. The person finds out it was all a setup, and the house owner was hooked up to a machine in a similar vein to Inception. No actual damage was done, but there is a known weakness. They did not take any data to their advantage, therefore not really doing anything bad, apart from delay Skyrim.
They should put it in the heart of some extremely hard to break into facility, and then give it some silly effect.Low Key said:I think Bethesda has a good enough sense of humor to put a top hat somewhere in one of their games because of this.
I have to disagree that companies would act like that in the current environment (but that's just differing opinions) and unless I see specific evidence of a company after the PSN attack literally ignoring a threat like that I'm inclined to believe that the companies wouldn't just chalk it up as nonsense.Shale_Dirk said:People regularly tell companies that their security is lacking. Most companies choose to brush off such comments as fear-mongering or bs.lovest harding said:If they want to enhance security so much and are willing to hack for free, why the hell not just inform Bethesda upfront and simply not take anything instead of turning this into we're going to hack and take stuff for the lulz, then return what was taken saying that they like the company?
I fail to see how this is the best way to inform a company of it's website security issues.
I call bullshit on them just wanting to help their security anyway.
Look at their track record and tell me, honestly, that all they want to do is help companies they like.
I'm starting to realize that all of these operations are actually for the overall betterment of the internet. People are starting to pay attention to security, instead of simply assuming that their personal information is completely safe in the hands of a company. Companies are starting to actually listen when people tell them that they are not as invincible as they claim that they are. While I don't agree with them releasing the information that they've managed to get from these sites, overall they are doing something that will hopefully make the internet safer overall. Because they are posting the methods they use to gain access to each of the sites, you better believe that security techs are trying to update their sites ASAP to prevent such breaches from affecting them as well.
So if I go in to a store and decide that that store is selling things I don't think they should I can steal that item (or how about the human resource files, so I have all the stores employee information?) to make the point that it isn't worth selling?Therumancer said:I think the obvious point is being missed here. Brink is a game that by all accounts is a second rate rip off of "Team Fortress". Like almost every other attempt to do something that isn't an RPG, Bethesda has basically produced a second rate product. I think what the Lulzboat is doing is nuking "Brink" as a way of saying "let this die, and invest the effort in what your really good at.
See, by giving back the information that they took from all of Bethesda's other products everyone knows what they got, and information protection services can go to work. With Brink it's a little more difficult because it's unknown how much they walked away with, and if they still have their fingers in it.
If people stop playing Brink and the product dies, with Bethesda pulling out the support, that's more effort that can go into their other projects. Supporting something like Brink probably involving a lot of time, effort, and resources on their part (though I could be wrong about that).
At least that's what they seem to be saying, it's not *just* "we hacked you because we liked you, now tighten up your security" there is actually a point being made here.
Truthfully I'm hardly the only Fallout/Elder Scrolls fan who hasn't wanted to give Bethesda a kick in the keister and get them to keep focusing on the games that I actually want to play, even when it comes to Elder Scrolls spin offs and so on, they have a really bad tendency of producing a sub-standard product outside of their core "sandbox RPG" format.
I'm not defending this paticular act. Understand something, when it comes to the Sony situation specifically I have no sympathy for them because as far as I am concerned they stole from their customer base by removing the "other OS" option. Bethesda on the other hand did not do anything of the sort. I am simply explaining why I think they did it, and what their message actually was.lovest harding said:So if I go in to a store and decide that that store is selling things I don't think they should I can steal that item (or how about the human resource files, so I have all the stores employee information?) to make the point that it isn't worth selling?Therumancer said:I think the obvious point is being missed here. Brink is a game that by all accounts is a second rate rip off of "Team Fortress". Like almost every other attempt to do something that isn't an RPG, Bethesda has basically produced a second rate product. I think what the Lulzboat is doing is nuking "Brink" as a way of saying "let this die, and invest the effort in what your really good at.
See, by giving back the information that they took from all of Bethesda's other products everyone knows what they got, and information protection services can go to work. With Brink it's a little more difficult because it's unknown how much they walked away with, and if they still have their fingers in it.
If people stop playing Brink and the product dies, with Bethesda pulling out the support, that's more effort that can go into their other projects. Supporting something like Brink probably involving a lot of time, effort, and resources on their part (though I could be wrong about that).
At least that's what they seem to be saying, it's not *just* "we hacked you because we liked you, now tighten up your security" there is actually a point being made here.
Truthfully I'm hardly the only Fallout/Elder Scrolls fan who hasn't wanted to give Bethesda a kick in the keister and get them to keep focusing on the games that I actually want to play, even when it comes to Elder Scrolls spin offs and so on, they have a really bad tendency of producing a sub-standard product outside of their core "sandbox RPG" format.
You know what would be as effective? Standing in front of their offices and yelling profanities about how the game sucks!
Hacking Bethesda like this isn't going to make Bethesda look at their games and go, "You know, we got hacked for this game and despite it earning us money we're going to stop making discs and will no longer support the IP at all."
Yeah because hacking into companies, stealing information and not publishing the information they got because they "like" the company in question is not a problem!Right?ishist said:You people are ridiculous. Did you read the response from Bethesda? It amounted to "Oh, we hadn't noticed that vulnerability in our security, we're going to fix that now." Lulzsec didn't break anything, they didn't steal anything, they didn't even bring down the servers, they brought a vulnerability to light that very may well have been exploited at a different time by malicious hackers who want your CC data so they can steal your money. But Oh! Lulzsec Should be Lynched and burnt at the stake and disembowled and such for.....for....because!