Slashdot Mirror
Digital Thieves Use Ex-Employees Accounts
prostoalex writes "The New York Times is running an article about a new generation of digital thugs. Using unsecured wireless networks, free e-mail accounts, a wealth of security knowledge, and, most important - employee passwords, thieves are getting access to valuable company databases. Once they're in, they start extorting the companies to pay up for them to leave. Otherwise phony e-mails to customers and sensitive information published publicly will lead to an embarrassment."
It seems to me that the people telling us how "Many times, companies just pay the hackers off to avoid embarassment." have little or no real facts to back up those claims.
... where someone threatens a denial of service attack on an online gambling/betting or porn site that's already running "beneath the radar" of legislation in nations that would prefer to shut them down.
In other words, it's just sensationalist writing.
In any nation with reasonably well enforced laws protecting a company's I.P. - I would think it's pointless for an extortionist to even attempt this. Sure, you might have the technical means to steal the proprietary info (especially if the company has unsecured or poorly secured wi-fi networks), but then what?
Even the guy in this story got caught after unsuccessfully trying to scam money out of just one company. And today, it would seem to be much more difficult to get away with than it was even a few years ago. The government and law enforcement are getting more knowledgable about Internet-based crime all the time, and since 9-11, the U.S. at least has enacted more laws giving feds the ability to "spy" on net traffic and trace things back to their source.
I really don't believe any legitimate business would think it made sense to pay some hacker millions of dollars in extortion money. This is MUCH more effective in situations like the one discussed in a Slashdot story a while back
Only a few months ago I read from a respectable psychiatric source (and I wish I could find you a link right now) that more than 10% of those in 'political' life likely suffer from a form of narcassistic psychopathic personality disorder. NPD is one of the most frightening disorders when you really understand it, you actually have no core personality and understand youself only in a power relation to others whose behaviour defines your own. What we commonly call charismatic and charming people are more likely to be NPD sufferers. Politicians and confidence tricksters are commonly sufferers, rather than being 'clever' (NPDs are often marked by above average intelligence) they are deeply damaged. Many of those we hold in high regard as leaders and 'action' people are actually mentally ill, normatively speaking.
If you have never heard of this I suggest you research it and you will be astonished how the symptom list fits the behaviour of so many public figures.