I think it's nice to see a real example of media whoring to contrast against media promiscuity.
If I could be charged with submitting a web form that had no authentication or security or warnings, it'd stand to reason that they could.
Morally wrong? It was certainly poor netiquette.
Oh, nothing specific. Just that it's a convenient claim. But as someone who's made a number of convenient claims which happen to be true, these things happen.
If I were less ethical it'd be ideal to find a reason to cast doubt on that claim. God knows I can't launch cruise missiles to distract from a scandal like a sitting president might.
There's nothing to make of it, really. The warrant being executed was probably related to the AT&T thing, unless he was running multiple simultaneous criminal enterprises. they found stuff that warranted local charges, and those charges were filed. It's only news by confluence of events.
Like if I got arrested for hooking tomorrow, for instance. odds are, it'd be news, but would it on its own be news? No. Would it be legitimately related to the Manning case? No. But tech media would feel compelled to report on it, and I'd find it hard to fault them."
Unless I was Marion Barry. Then it'd just be funny.
So the bottom line then -- given the minimal risks, AT&T customers shouldn't be concerned, right, past taking standard security precautions like using a strong password, employing a spam filter, and not responding to requests to retrieve lost information?
My dad has an iPad, and I haven't even brought this up to him. I'm usually the least alarmist security expert in the rolodex though, and tend to get bumped for someone who allocutes that it's absolutely a critical concern for all involved, and could compromise nat'l security too.