Now the question that I have about this senator's letter is does he truly mean everyone or only residents in the USA?
U.S. Senator Blasts Sony for Keeping Breach Secret
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
I'm gunna call shenanigans here. Its certainly possible that he somehow has inside information but I very much doubt it. It sounds like a publicity stunt. I would be more apt to believe Random Sony Employee 4356712.1 than a politician that somehow has insider information. Furthermore, if he was so concerned about the public why did he not produce this information a week ago himself.
Given how little anyone outside of Sony knows about this, I'd say it's a bit early to any throwing down, or blaming for that matter, yet. But if Sony did withhold information on the attack, then they deserve a bit of criticism.HankMan said:Eri said:This kind of fast reaction makes me wonder if the good Senator is a PS gamer..?
MattAn24 said:Dragon Zero said:You guys should check out the man's <url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Blumenthal#Attorney_General_career>Wikipedia page. He makes a habit of standing up for the little people, and Sony isn't the first <url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Blumenthal#Microsoft_lawsuit>Software giant he's thrown down with.Vanbael said:
Good. I'm not the only one who's going, "Um...don't you have more IMPORTANT things to worry about?" Granted, for us gamers this is pretty bad, but Senators have other things that they should be throwing themselves at.Greg Tito said:
Why do people insist on spreading this ridiculous idea? The PS3 jailbreak was entirely on the client side. It should have done nothing to enable access to the PSN servers where this data is stored. If it did, PSN has some of the worst security design ever implemented. Geohot did not steal user info. He did not enable the theft of user info. If you have any questions about this I will be happy to answer them.Dr. McD said:
I would doubt it. Microsoft has always kept a much tighter leash on its networks and data, and after this attack, I would hope that Microsoft is tightening up its already-choking leash is anticipation. I don't think Xbox has to worry. ALthough if these people were good enough to bring down the entire PSN network for almost a week, who knows?Tdc2182 said:
puffenstuff said:
...you agree that you would not hold the company or its affiliates responsible for:
??(c) any unauthorized access to or use of our secure servers or any and all non-secured personal information (d) any interruption or the cessation of transmission ??
basically they can say the above and tell you that its not their fault
that type of crap
THIS ENTIRELY.Susurrus said:
To Greg Tito: Mate, it might not be a big deal to you "in the grand scheme of things", but that's probably because you don't have your financial information on the line, or if you do, you can cancel your credit cards or fix it up no problem. For those who can't, for those who are much worse off financially, this is just a blind-sided strike to the groin. I agree that it's not as big as the recession, but that's like saying a random civilian getting shot in the face for no reason is not as big the tsunami in Japan. One is a bigger issue, yes, but does that take away the gravity of the civilian's murder?
_ On some level what you're saying is true, but that does not mean the situation should be treated as lightly as your wording suggests. Primarily, let's not compare the two and let's focus on getting our points across on both the grander, and smaller scale issues.
There are millions more wondering the same damn thing. Why the shit can't politicians get their priorities strait? Oh wait, there's a presidential election coming up in two years. Time to look good to some constituents!Greg Tito said:
....*grumble* worthless *grumble*....
Ah. That enters into the legal realm. I meant questions about the technical end of things, but I'll take a stab at it.RaikuFA said:
I think that language might protect them in some jurisdictions. Some US states have laws that specifically require merchants to take financial responsibility but I don't think the federal government has any such law. There also seems to be a standard of negligence that needs to be met. So if a company took what a court decides are reasonable measures to protect the data they are off the hook, but if not then they may still be liable. This is just me doing a little googleing on the subject so take it with a grain of salt.
If you want to know what the law should say: Language like that should not protect them. A company should be 100% liable for data losses of its customers. It is the only way to ensure that proper precautions are taken. This also ties into the larger problem of click-through contracts. We really need to put some restrictions on what can be in a shrink-wrap or click-through contract. The are fundamentally different from a regular contract because the power balance between a company and customer is far different than the power balance between two companies or two individuals.
tl;dr: It's complicated and could go either way in the courts... I think.
None of which has any bearing on the problem at hand. Which is my point. Geohot had nothing to do with PSN's problems.Dr. McD said:
He's the guy who got busted for fibbing about his Vietnam service.Dragon Zero said:
He also sits on the subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights and the subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law. Kinda makes sense that he'd be jumping on the bandwagon.
Can we confidently say that when we don't know the exact cause of Sony's problems? For all we know, EgoHot hacked them himself. I'm not saying he did, but no one can say he didn't. Not at this point and not given the know facts (which are zero facts).puffenstuff said:
Yeah, I think that is accurate. With the small addition that, despite speculation that custom firmware played a part in the breach, it did not. And if it did, PSN has the most pants on head retarded security design possible.JDKJ said: