Live data from Hacker News

Oracle attempt to hide cybersecurity incident from customers?

doublepulsar.com

131–136 of 136 posts

Re: Oracle attempt to hide cybersecurity incident from customers?

#131
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have absolutely no idea if you are being facetious or naive there. Yes. Oracle is absolutely the tech vendor that's going to be dropped on the engineering team with zero input and no consideration for whether it fits the problems they have, after your CTO spends a a few days on the golf course and high end steak restaurants and, depending on how much money their enterprise sales team thinks they have, either high c…

> I have absolutely no idea if you are being facetious or naive there. Neither, but perhaps worse: I am young. Are there any compilations of apocryphal stories of the events you described? It sounds too fantastic to be real.

It would be like people compiling stories of eating a sandwich. No one is doing it because of how unremarkable and common it is.

Re: Oracle attempt to hide cybersecurity incident from customers?

#132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have absolutely no idea if you are being facetious or naive there. Neither, but perhaps worse: I am young. Are there any compilations of apocryphal stories of the events you described? It sounds too fantastic to be real.

It would be like people compiling stories of eating a sandwich. No one is doing it because of how unremarkable and common it is.

Many have written about Gavrilo Princip’s trip to the cafe - if the sandwich has sufficient intrigue and scandal around it, people will write (and read) about it.

Re: Oracle attempt to hide cybersecurity incident from customers?

#133
post #110
post #8

There are various state laws that require companies to notify their customers of security breaches, but they lack enforcement/teeth so they're routinely ignored. It'll never happen in our current environment but we really need a federal law that causes violators enough pain that companies will actually bother to follow the law.

I don't get your argument. Wouldn't adding teeth to the state laws be the right thing to do?

It would help, but it'd be better for everyone if there was just one law to worry about which covered everyone (or at least set a minimum standard) rather than having 50 different versions of the same law all over the country each with their own definitions, thresholds, penalties, etc. It'd make things a lot less complicated for both companies and consumers, especially given how often a single company's data being exposed impacts people all over the nation.

Re: Oracle attempt to hide cybersecurity incident from customers?

#134
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have absolutely no idea if you are being facetious or naive there. Yes. Oracle is absolutely the tech vendor that's going to be dropped on the engineering team with zero input and no consideration for whether it fits the problems they have, after your CTO spends a a few days on the golf course and high end steak restaurants and, depending on how much money their enterprise sales team thinks they have, either high c…

> I have absolutely no idea if you are being facetious or naive there. Neither, but perhaps worse: I am young. Are there any compilations of apocryphal stories of the events you described? It sounds too fantastic to be real.

Yes that sort of stuff happens all the time in the business side of things. There’s a reason it’s a trope.

Not to every company per se but it’s been commonplace well probably for as long as business itself has been.

Just an example - nothing that happened in wolf of wall street was original to them - just the getting famous for being caught part. And that was only a few decades ago.

The defense and finance industries are famous for that sort of thing. I’m sure it’s pervasive elsewhere too.

There’s nothing special about software or tech or clouds that makes schmoozing impossible.

Re: Oracle attempt to hide cybersecurity incident from customers?

#136
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get your argument. Wouldn't adding teeth to the state laws be the right thing to do?

It would help, but it'd be better for everyone if there was just one law to worry about which covered everyone (or at least set a minimum standard) rather than having 50 different versions of the same law all over the country each with their own definitions, thresholds, penalties, etc. It'd make things a lot less complicated for both companies and consumers, especially given how often a single company's data being ex…

You don't like federalism much, do you?

Btw, states already coordinate voluntarily on things like traffic signs, without there being a central authority. (That's both true for states in the US, and for different countries around the world. A stop sign looks pretty much nearly the same around the world, without any central authority enforcing that.)

Post reply on HN