Tut tut tut
Tut. That is all.
Microsoft India has warned customers of its online store that their financial details may have been compromised, backtracking on a previous statement to the contrary. Chinese hackers, apparently members of a group known as Evil Shadow Team, were thought to have breached Microsoft’s systems earlier this month, defacing the …
Tut. That is all.
"In time honoured fashion, however, Redmond has now been forced to admit that this prognosis may have been a little over-hasty, and optimistic, according to Wall Street Journal India blogger and Microsoft customer, Amit Agarwal."
Would it also be possible that the Indian branch tried to keep things covered up and that Redmond has now forced them to put the cards on the table?
That scenario sounds much more likely to me, yet the article is a bit vague there. As such; "forced by who?".
Whether you're right or not, it was an "over-hasty", "optimistic" and premature announcement for MS to make before MS itself had checked the facts. Nothing wrong there, in terms of journalism.
Don't say "It hasn't happened" unless you've absolutely, cast-iron, 100% verified it hasn't. Or you'll look like a pillock who doesn't know what the hell their own company is doing. You could say "We're investigating", or "Our inquiries are still being pursued but we don't believe that..." etc.
If you say, in effect, "Your card numbers are safe", you better be damn sure they are.
When Steam was compromised a few months back, they took WEEKS to investigate and still gave only "We think they only got encrypted copies". As such, they didn't look half as incompetent as MS have here (and it's still believed that not one single card number has been stolen from Steam BECAUSE everything was properly encrypted in the first place).
Or, conversely, the operators of the store told Microsoft that the CC details were safe... why would MS believe otherwise? And how would they prove it?
It is quite likely that it is indeed the investigations that MS have carried out that have forced the provider to come clean...
Now, should MS have made the statement in the first place? Debateable. operators said it was safe, should MS have believed them?
Where did you pull that one out from ? I know, from your the forefathers grave who were l basically conniving theives who looted the subcontinent!
Rich I tell ya
You're right, but there is one unwritten company "law" which is even more important: never /ever/ attack colleagues / co-workers in public. Because that will make the whole company look bad. So if this branch said that there was nothing wrong; why would HQ (Redmond) question that ?
Although this is about Microsoft as a company I just can't help wonder if the main cause of the problem wasn't with the Indian branch itself.
Microsoft (see there, I spelled it correctly) is now caught with `egg on its face`, and its CEO is "embarrassed". An explanation is demanded. People need to be held accountable.
So, the fools that told Microsoft are hauled into Ballmer's office, and get to experience one of Ballmer's `infamous` chair throwing episodes. Unfortunately, for them, they are IN the chair as it sails out the window.
Icon department, can we get a chair throwing icon please!
Otherwise, FAIL, because that is the obvious choice.
"Would it also be possible that the Indian branch tried to keep things covered up and that Redmond has now forced them to put the cards on the table?"
Absolutely, Microsoft has never been known to release misleading statements to the public.
I seem to recall reading that the servers operated in India were by a non-MS subsidiary and not "MS India".
But why would MS not operate the web store? Can't they scale a website for global use?
Maybe they outsourced it to India.... Oh wait!