graeme_p
msg:4415166 | 7:42 pm on Feb 7, 2012 (gmt 0) |
1) Never give in to extortion. Symantec are quite right there
2) How crap is your code if a leak is such an issue?
3) How long until the "authorised OS only" keys MS is having in all WIndows 8 PC BIOSes gets leaked.
|
J_RaD
msg:4415180 | 8:41 pm on Feb 7, 2012 (gmt 0) |
silly to even try extortion, that money will have the biggest bullseye on it.
|
badbadmonkey
msg:4415274 | 2:43 am on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
What do Symantec lose if the blackmailer goes thru with his threats?
- Piracy already an obvious problem, pirates/freeloaders prefer "retail" distributions with installers etc, i.e. nobody will bother to compile the code for the sake of free software.
- Competitors would be nuts to copy any of the code, for obvious copyright infringement liabilities.
- Similarly any software patents stand alone and being able to see how something is coded is of little use in getting around them.
Maybe a bit of embarrassment if their code is of poor quality and vulnerable to geek/industry ridicule.
|
tangor
msg:4415276 | 2:48 am on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
Any revelation of how the app works opens tremendous opportunity for virus writers, though I do agree that one does not give in to extortion/blackmail.
|
ergophobe
msg:4415287 | 3:11 am on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
Hypothesis: hackers knew they weren't getting any money, but knew that by asking for it they would get a HUGE news story.
Most people writing viruses are not trying to make money, it's simple vandalism and ego gratification.
Symantec made, I think, an error by commenting on the case and cooperating with the media.
|
tangor
msg:4415302 | 3:53 am on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
Or the "leaked code" was a plant by Symantec to throw the virus writers off the track.
</tinfoil off>
|
outland88
msg:4415341 | 8:02 am on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
Seal Team 6 won't be bringing this one back for ID so this fellows friends should desert him pronto.
|
Vamm
msg:4415401 | 11:37 am on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
tangor,
You don't really write 1.2GB of consistent source code to throw someone off the track. That's sort of inefficient.
|
bhonda
msg:4415404 | 11:45 am on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
| That's sort of inefficient. |
|
Or really, really committed.
|
StoutFiles
msg:4415414 | 1:22 pm on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
The hackers didn't ask for 50k, Symantec offered that in hopes that they could follow the money trail. The hackers said no, because 50k is not worth the chance of getting caught, and released the code. Symantec has failed at every step of this story.
|
bhonda
msg:4415416 | 1:49 pm on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
A little bit off-topic, and probably fairly naive, but how is The Pirate Bay still up and running?
Wasn't MegaUpload shut down because of its dubious content...how can Pirate Bay still be up if it hosts a high-profile piece of stolen work like this Symantec code?
I'm not arguing either way, I'm just a little bit confused - I feel like I'm missing something somewhere!
|
StoutFiles
msg:4415422 | 2:10 pm on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
MegaUpload had servers in Virginia, therefore they were subject to American laws. Admins were able to be arrested in New Zealand because they have an agreement with America to extradite felons.
|
bhonda
msg:4415430 | 2:37 pm on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
Gotcha - I assume Pirate Bay isn't in the US then. Thanks for explaining!
|
J_RaD
msg:4415431 | 2:38 pm on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
there is also this other tricky bit that PB servers don't actually host ANY stolen content.
where as megaupload actually hosted the stuff right their on their servers.
|
StoutFiles
msg:4415464 | 3:32 pm on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
there is also this other tricky bit that PB servers don't actually host ANY stolen content.
where as megaupload actually hosted the stuff right their on their servers. |
|
True. America has taken down middleman software before (Napster) but it's harder to do legally. MegaUpload made it easy to shut them down.
|
ergophobe
msg:4415524 | 5:35 pm on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
| The hackers didn't ask for 50k, Symantec offered that in hopes that they could follow the money trail. |
|
That is positively idiotic. I didn't realize that Symantec had any employees that stupid, let alone one with access to $50,000 in petty cash.
|
J_RaD
msg:4415620 | 9:25 pm on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
True. America has taken down middleman software before (Napster)
|
|
well with napster and the other types of those programs it was P2P ... and you traded files 1 to 1 with another person. So whoever sent whoever that file just gave someone an illegal copy.
torrents spread everything out all over the place... so each person only shares a few useless bits of data with other people, its not illegal to send people small bits of useless data.. its how all that is re-assembled on the other side.
|
Chico_Loco
msg:4415648 | 11:49 pm on Feb 8, 2012 (gmt 0) |
| torrents spread everything out all over the place... so each person only shares a few useless bits of data with other people, its not illegal to send people small bits of useless data.. its how all that is re-assembled on the other side. |
|
I'm pretty sure it IS illegal if those small bits of data comprise part of a program that is/was acquired/distributed illegal.
Napster may have been 1-to-1 but that's pretty much the same as multiple-to-1 if the end result is the person illegally obtaining something.
|
graeme_p
msg:4415849 | 12:31 pm on Feb 9, 2012 (gmt 0) |
@J_RAD, torrenting does breach copyright. One thing I did find interesting is that Priate Bay indexes legal torrents as well (I wonder if that affects legality?).
On the other hand it makes it less practical to track people down reliably.
|
JohnRoy
msg:4417148 | 9:59 pm on Feb 13, 2012 (gmt 0) |
| The hackers didn't ask for 50k, Symantec offered that in hopes that they could follow the money trail. The hackers said no, because 50k is not worth the chance of getting caught, and released the code. Symantec has failed at every step of this story. |
|
Agree that this makes sense.
Figured this was the case since 50k is way to little as ROI.
Still, any source for this claim?
|
|
