Reply to post: Re: Really?

Second Ashley Madison dump prompts more inside-job speculation

h4rm0ny

Re: Really?

>>"The hubris of these people is astonishing. Surely they can't survive as a going concern after this."

As pointed out multiple times by people, it is very, very hard to guard against attacks from the inside. Your technical safeguards can be as good as you like but ask Snowden how much that hindered him.

But yes, the witch hunt is on. One quote in the media I saw on this was from someone saying "they couldn't find their husband's email address on the list so they must have used a fake email account then". My other favourite is someone who is complaining about the leak because they signed up to AM to try and catch their husband cheating on them and now she's on the list and he is not - and she's blaming AM for it. I'm not saying AM are without fault here - I simply don't know and I doubt anyone outside the investigating people (and the hacker) actually can say. I'm just pointing out that a lot of the finger-pointing going on here isn't reasonable. Yes, you can score a few cheap upvotes by expressing disbelief at someone's hubris/stupidity/credulity/whatever - you always can because the Internet mob is addicted to seeing people have flaws pointed out. They love it more than chips. But that doesn't necessarily make it so.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019