By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Wrongly Jailed Security Whistleblower Caught Up in PlayStation Hacker Hunt

fordy on 02 May 2011
ithis said:
fordy said:

What the hell?

I had to read this again. Is this article for real? Sony use RedHat for their authentication server?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 10 years ago RedHat was one of the suites that the people in the business referred to as "Linux for Dummies". Don't get me wrong. It's a very nice system, but it's initial setup can be rather bloated when compared to other kernel distributions.

That was back in the time where if you wanted security, you'd implement an operating system with open, but tight regulations on the source, such as OpenBSD. I dunno. Have RedHat changed their ways and become less bloated? I stopped tracking them after I moved up to Debian.


Wasn't RedHat made into a comercial offering for enterprise servers at one point? Maybe that variont of it is/was a different animal?

You could be right there...

Regardless, it now sounds like this was the cause of Sony becoming rather lax on their Apache updates.



Around the Network
fordy on 02 May 2011
fps_d0minat0r said:

his intent might not be to cause harm through hacking but what if he discussed that information with one of his hacker friends who made use of it? he still becomes the root of the problem so its correct that he gets interrogated.

The information that this guy obtained was there for anyone to see, with relative ease. Anyone could poll the server and interrogate what it was running. It could have been anyone who decided to try it. There are many hackers jumping from server to server searching out vulnerabilities. If anything, Sony should have taken notice of his warning.



ithis on 02 May 2011
fps_d0minat0r said:

his intent might not be to cause harm through hacking but what if he discussed that information with one of his hacker friends who made use of it? he still becomes the root of the problem so its correct that he gets interrogated.


It's more likely that these vulnerabilities were already knowd by would be malicious hackers. As the post reads itself, this was a warning to, among others, Sony itself. Someone should have listened. Would have been way cheaper that this.



fps_d0minat0r on 02 May 2011
fordy said:
fps_d0minat0r said:

his intent might not be to cause harm through hacking but what if he discussed that information with one of his hacker friends who made use of it? he still becomes the root of the problem so its correct that he gets interrogated.

The information that this guy obtained was there for anyone to see, with relative ease. Anyone could poll the server and interrogate what it was running. It could have been anyone who decided to try it. There are many hackers jumping from server to server searching out vulnerabilities. If anytihng, Sony should have taken notice of his warning.

 

anyone can jump a fence but its the guy who does it that counts, not everyone who decided not to.

and their only questioning him, its not like their going to throw him in jail. they didnt throw geo hot in jail why would they do that to this guy whose done far less harm? (if there isnt much more to the case than stated in the article)



fordy on 02 May 2011
fps_d0minat0r said:
fordy said:
fps_d0minat0r said:

his intent might not be to cause harm through hacking but what if he discussed that information with one of his hacker friends who made use of it? he still becomes the root of the problem so its correct that he gets interrogated.

The information that this guy obtained was there for anyone to see, with relative ease. Anyone could poll the server and interrogate what it was running. It could have been anyone who decided to try it. There are many hackers jumping from server to server searching out vulnerabilities. If anytihng, Sony should have taken notice of his warning.

 

anyone can jump a fence but its the guy who does it that counts, not everyone who decided not to.

and their only questioning him, its not like their going to throw him in jail. they didnt throw geo hot in jail why would they do that to this guy whose done far less harm? (if there isnt much more to the case than stated in the article)


Too bad they paid no attention to him earlier, when it could have been prevented. So you originally stated interrogation, and now it's "only questioning him". Which is right? If I was interrogated for corporate interest, I'd tell them exactly where to go!



Around the Network
fps_d0minat0r on 02 May 2011
fordy said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
fordy said:
fps_d0minat0r said:

his intent might not be to cause harm through hacking but what if he discussed that information with one of his hacker friends who made use of it? he still becomes the root of the problem so its correct that he gets interrogated.

The information that this guy obtained was there for anyone to see, with relative ease. Anyone could poll the server and interrogate what it was running. It could have been anyone who decided to try it. There are many hackers jumping from server to server searching out vulnerabilities. If anytihng, Sony should have taken notice of his warning.

 

anyone can jump a fence but its the guy who does it that counts, not everyone who decided not to.

and their only questioning him, its not like their going to throw him in jail. they didnt throw geo hot in jail why would they do that to this guy whose done far less harm? (if there isnt much more to the case than stated in the article)


Too bad they paid no attention to him earlier, when it could have been prevented. So you originally stated interrogation, and now it's "only questioning him". Which is right? If I was interrogated for corporate interest, I'd tell them exactly where to go!


interrogation and questioning is the same thing.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?sclient=psy&hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=define: interrogate&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1

and btw it wont be sony doing it, they probably dont have the resources or the power. it will be the agencies like FBI who are working with sony.



fordy on 02 May 2011
fps_d0minat0r said:
fordy said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
fordy said:
fps_d0minat0r said:

his intent might not be to cause harm through hacking but what if he discussed that information with one of his hacker friends who made use of it? he still becomes the root of the problem so its correct that he gets interrogated.

The information that this guy obtained was there for anyone to see, with relative ease. Anyone could poll the server and interrogate what it was running. It could have been anyone who decided to try it. There are many hackers jumping from server to server searching out vulnerabilities. If anytihng, Sony should have taken notice of his warning.

 

anyone can jump a fence but its the guy who does it that counts, not everyone who decided not to.

and their only questioning him, its not like their going to throw him in jail. they didnt throw geo hot in jail why would they do that to this guy whose done far less harm? (if there isnt much more to the case than stated in the article)


Too bad they paid no attention to him earlier, when it could have been prevented. So you originally stated interrogation, and now it's "only questioning him". Which is right? If I was interrogated for corporate interest, I'd tell them exactly where to go!


interrogation and questioning is the same thing.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?sclient=psy&hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=define: interrogate&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1

and btw it wont be sony doing it, they probably dont have the resources or the power. it will be the agencies like FBI who are working with sony.


Yeah, interesting that, how a taxpayer funded agency has to tep in and clean up Sony's mess that they could have prevented with proper updates. If I was on the American taxroll, I'd be demanding answers.

Corporate rule, Capitalise the gains, Socialise the losses. I doubt Sony would be sharing any of their profits with the FBI in return for heping them out.



fps_d0minat0r on 02 May 2011
fordy said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
fordy said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
fordy said:
fps_d0minat0r said:

his intent might not be to cause harm through hacking but what if he discussed that information with one of his hacker friends who made use of it? he still becomes the root of the problem so its correct that he gets interrogated.

The information that this guy obtained was there for anyone to see, with relative ease. Anyone could poll the server and interrogate what it was running. It could have been anyone who decided to try it. There are many hackers jumping from server to server searching out vulnerabilities. If anytihng, Sony should have taken notice of his warning.

 

anyone can jump a fence but its the guy who does it that counts, not everyone who decided not to.

and their only questioning him, its not like their going to throw him in jail. they didnt throw geo hot in jail why would they do that to this guy whose done far less harm? (if there isnt much more to the case than stated in the article)


Too bad they paid no attention to him earlier, when it could have been prevented. So you originally stated interrogation, and now it's "only questioning him". Which is right? If I was interrogated for corporate interest, I'd tell them exactly where to go!


interrogation and questioning is the same thing.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?sclient=psy&hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=define: interrogate&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1

and btw it wont be sony doing it, they probably dont have the resources or the power. it will be the agencies like FBI who are working with sony.


Yeah, interesting that, how a taxpayer funded agency has to tep in and clean up Sony's mess that they could have prevented with proper updates. If I was on the American taxroll, I'd be demanding answers.

Corporate rule, Capitalise the gains, Socialise the losses. I doubt Sony would be sharing any of their profits with the FBI in return for heping them out.


businesses also pay tax....

and its not only a matter of sony. if these hackers do not get arrested, it could be another company....and another....and another. the more attacks that happen the lower public confidence is in the government for not stopping it.

thats why in another thread i said the government questionning sony is only a formality. their main target is the offenders who are likely to repeat their actions if they are not caught.

I think this guy is innocent as far as the credit card details go. i have no clue about the laws on probing server security but there probably will be some.



Galaki on 02 May 2011
fordy said:

Capitalise the gains, Socialise the losses.

Welcome to America.



Pre-order limited edition Blue Slime Condoms

fordy on 02 May 2011
fps_d0minat0r said:


businesses also pay tax....

and its not only a matter of sony. if these hackers do not get arrested, it could be another company....and another....and another. the more attacks that happen the lower public confidence is in the government for not stopping it.

thats why in another thread i said the government questionning sony is only a formality. their main target is the offenders who are likely to repeat their actions if they are not caught.

I think this guy is innocent as far as the credit card details go. i have no clue about the laws on probing server security but there probably will be some.

Businesses also overuse government resources when compared to average taxpayers.

So tell me, does SONY CORP (Japanese manufacturer) pay it's fair share to the US, in order to utilise US services to investigate a crime that most likely happened in Europe?

So I guess that government questioning BP was also a formality hm? BP actually got fined for it's incompetence. Sony should count themselves lucky in that regard.