Even if this was the correct way to handle such an incident, how can you be sure that once you've paid the hackers they actually destroy the data?
Uber Paid Hackers to Delete Stolen Data on 57M People
201–210 of 606 posts
Re: Uber Paid Hackers to Delete Stolen Data on 57M People
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because those more money may not be enough to pay for more people that would need to be hired? While existing stuff may be wiling to stay 30 minutes more occasionally, they might not like the idea of having even longer shifts all the time.
You can scale the price to find a point where it's economical to offer to stay open while maintaining good relations and if the demand is consistent and heavy then scale that price appropriately or, alternatively, simply refuse to service repeat offenders if it's becoming a serious headache. It's a bit of a hard question because the daycare may not have a legal way to stop holding the child, unlike fedex they can't s…
They can always call child services, and have DCFS pick up the kid. I think that is what one of the local daycares by me does, after a certain cutoff time (i.e., they can't be expected to stay open all night).
Re: Uber Paid Hackers to Delete Stolen Data on 57M People
#203I don't know, paying off the hackers might have been the best call. It prevented my data from being exposed into the wild vs notifying authorities which would have all but guaranteed a leak. If the objective was to protect Ubers' customers, mission accomplished. Should they have covered it up and not disclosed it? No, but this is as a tough call ethically.
Re: Uber Paid Hackers to Delete Stolen Data on 57M People
#204Re: Uber Paid Hackers to Delete Stolen Data on 57M People
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same as `googling` will long remain the synonym for `searching the internet`.
> Same as `googling` will long remain the synonym for `searching the internet`. That's more due to the ubiquity and dominance of Google itself. It's rare to hear someone say "I Googled it on Bing" or even "Let me Google my email" when they're using Outlook. Maybe not unheard-of, but definitely nowhere near the threshold needed for genericization.
>It's rare to hear someone say "I Googled it on Bing" //
True AFAIK but if you ever give computer support you'll find people "just google it" and use the greeting page on their browser [aka "the internet"] which is just as often Bing or Yahoo as it is Google. Google, the verb, is definitely generic but the RTM holders of Google have several hundred million of $currency to spend on lawyers to say it isn't.
Re: Uber Paid Hackers to Delete Stolen Data on 57M People
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
What? Uber acted in an unethical manner? Seriously, is anyone surprised? I kinda hope (but not really) that they get hacked again in June 2018 and play the same trick.. us in the EU will have a party on Uber's corpse over GDPR.
And then we can go back to getting ripped off by taxis. I’ve lost more money in taxi rip offs than I ever spent on Uber. Other than the sexist nonsense of the CEO, there really is an irrational hatred of Uber. Are many of us secretly moonlighting as cab drivers? Uber’s nonsense is minuscule compared to generations of taxi corruption. This isn’t me excusing Uber but it does seem like many people, especially Europeans…
Or maybe it's because people have valid concerns about little things like privacy, ethics, sexism, and the longer term effects of disruption that places more money and power into the hands of companies that are more than willing to overlook whatever regulations they deem are irrelevant.
Having those concerns isn't the same as unfailingly supporting incumbents, out of date regulation or a love of government.
Re: Uber Paid Hackers to Delete Stolen Data on 57M People
#207"In January 2016, the New York attorney general fined Uber $20,000 for failing to promptly disclose an earlier data breach in 2014." Because you know...20k really really hurts for a company like Uber.
I recall a story (that I'll probably recount incorrectly) about a daycare business deciding that too many parents were arriving late to pick up their children (meaning that staff had to stay late with the kids), so they instituted a fine for late pickups. The result was that more parents were late. The reason being that the parents effectively considered the fine a "late pickup fee", and one they were more than willi…
Well, day care operators have since learned...
... as I sit in my home office, just over an hour away from day care closing time I assure you I'm watching the clock like a hungry hawk watching a mouse. See, my kid's day care charges a mere $600 per hour late (billed in 1 minute increments).
I don't see kids parents late that often :-) and we've come close to missing it, but haven't in two years.
Re: Uber Paid Hackers to Delete Stolen Data on 57M People
#208Earlier quoted context omitted.
What? Uber acted in an unethical manner? Seriously, is anyone surprised? I kinda hope (but not really) that they get hacked again in June 2018 and play the same trick.. us in the EU will have a party on Uber's corpse over GDPR.
And then we can go back to getting ripped off by taxis. I’ve lost more money in taxi rip offs than I ever spent on Uber. Other than the sexist nonsense of the CEO, there really is an irrational hatred of Uber. Are many of us secretly moonlighting as cab drivers? Uber’s nonsense is minuscule compared to generations of taxi corruption. This isn’t me excusing Uber but it does seem like many people, especially Europeans…
> Do you people actually like having government pick winners and losers
Yes, many many people do.
Re: Uber Paid Hackers to Delete Stolen Data on 57M People
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
HSBC did not make trillions from those transactions and they were fined $1.9bn in 2012.
Did you ask any families with a family member killed by a cartel if a fine seemed reasonable?
Why would you respond like this to someone putting forward plain facts.
Re: Uber Paid Hackers to Delete Stolen Data on 57M People
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
So one should absolve themselves of any way they could stop it in a peaceful and legal manner?
No no. My point probably just wasn't properly conveyed. In the original post I replied to the person the person encouraged their friends to use Lyft after hearing about the terrible things over at Uber. Presumably they want friends to switch over as to not support an organization they disagree with, but my point was that doing so is pretty much impossible to begin with. If the goal is to not support organizations tha…
Taking money away from a bad company helps stop that company from doing bad. Similarly, voting for a politician who will try not to kill civilians helps prevent civilians from being killed. Both of these are correct actions to take. Moving out of the country is comparatively less effective, and continuing to give money to the bad company is not effective at all.