backtop


Print 56 comment(s) - last by BansheeX.. on May 25 at 4:36 AM


Another day, another Sony site hacked.  (Source: The Hacker News)
This time the stolen Sony database is from a Greek Sony property

It's hard to fathom how a company as big as Sony Corp. (6758) could have such porous defenses, as the events in recent weeks have unfolded.  Since late April, Sony has experienced a complete loss of customer records from its two largest international databases -- the PlayStation Network (PSN) database and the Sony Online Entertainment (SOE) database.  

Last week, the PSN network was briefly reactivated and then shut down after yet another security flaw was discovered.  And Japan announced that it would not be allowing Sony's online services to restart in its nation until the company showed proper proof that it had significantly improved its security.

Now yet those pesky hackers have compromised another Sony online property.  
 

I.  Third Sony Database Breached

This week a poster dumped a pretty interesting archive to text sharing site pastebin.  The record appears to contain a dump of the user database from Sony BMG in Greece.

Included in the post are usernames, real names, and email addresses.  

The post was eventually attributed to The Hacker News, who says they received the information from a hacker who goes by the handle "b4d_vipera".  The hacker appears to have redacted the information from certain fields, including password, telephone number, and user's company, though they claim to have this information.

In total 8,385 records were lost from SonyMusic.gr -- the website of Sony BMG in Greece.  The breach occurred May 5.

The attack was accomplished via an SQL Injection attack, a type of attack that first originated in the 1990s.  SQL Injection attacks are most commonly used on large entities with multiple websites.  The attacker finds SQL databases on various sites of the target and then tests them by sending strings that may be mishandled by the SQL Interpreter, allowing forbidden commands to be executed.

It is unclear whether the only Sony BMG in Greece was vulnerable or whether Sony BMG sites in other nations could have been vulnerable as well.

Security software and services vendor Sophos gave some interesting analysis on the breach in their Naked Security blog.   The blog suggests that the negligence likely wasn't the fault of Sony's engineers on the design side.  Writes Sophos's Chester Wisniewski:

As I mentioned in the Sophos Security Chet Chat 59 podcast at the beginning of the month, it is nearly impossible to run a totally secure web presence, especially when you are the size of Sony. As long as it is popular within the hacker community to expose Sony's flaws, we are likely to continue seeing successful attacks against them.

But Mr. Wisniewski says that Sony could have avoided these issues if had hired experts to do thorough penetration testing (fake attacks that look to simulate a malicious user to find and fix vulnerabilities).  He writes:

The lesson I take away from this is similar to other stories we have published on data breaches. It would cost far less to perform thorough penetration tests than to suffer the loss of trust, fines, disclosure costs and loss of reputation these incidents have resulted in.

He says that while Sony obviously is suffering from the barrage of attacks, at the end of the day it may be forced into having the most secure design on the market, much like Windows OS maker Microsoft Corp. (MSFT).  He comments, "While it's cruel to kick someone while they're down, when this is over, Sony may end up being one of the most secure web assets on the net."

II. The Cost to Sony

Richard Scott, a contributor of iconic infographics to BBC News and The New York Times, has set his sights on Sony with his latest graphic.  It depicts an estimated cost to Sony of $24B USD.

That estimate comes from research by The Ponemon Institute, a data-security research firm, who found that on average in 2010 a data breach cost a company $318 USD per lost record in security, user protection, and legal costs.  That represents a 48 percent increase from 2009.

Forbes suggests the $24B USD figure, but that's only
considering the PSN breach.  With the 24 million record SOE breach added in, the figure soars to $32.1B USD.

Sony is being conservative in its own cost estimates.  Its financial filings have indicated that the intrusions are clearly taking their toll on the company -- it went from predicting a ¥70B ($855M USD) profit for the year to now predicting a ¥260B ($3.14B USD) loss [source; PDF].  Sony blames much of that estimated loss on the earthquake (¥22B) and other factors.

The company say its expects only to have to pay ¥14B (about $172M USD) for the PSN intrusion.  This puts its expected expense per lost record at about $2 USD per account.

It seems Sony may be a bit too optimistic here.  If the industry average is $318 USD per lost record, it'd be extraordinary for Sony to get away with only paying $2 USD per record.

In 2010 Sony made $77.5B USD in revenue, with a $289M USD profit.  If it was forced to pay a $32.1B USD in total (based on the industry average) for the breaches it could end up with a net loss of $35B USD or more for this year.

A $35B USD loss would be equivalent to approximately half the company's annual revenue and equivalent to over 10 years in profit from relatively "good" years.  It remains to be seen exactly how dire the financial situation for Sony gets, but one thing's for sure -- the picture isn't pretty.

Sony is currently facing multiple class action lawsuits in the U.S. and abroad from former customers.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By cpeter38 on 5/23/2011 9:49:37 AM , Rating: 5
However, Sony is one of the most arrogant tech companies in the world. How many times have they burned the consumer (Blu-ray, Rootkit, MemoryStick, PS3 Homebrew, etc.)?

The true victims are the poor customers who trusted Sony.




RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By Homerboy on 5/23/11, Rating: 0
RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By bah12 on 5/23/2011 10:16:25 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
How as Blu-Ray a burn on the customer? Or the memStick? (don't want to use it, don't buy a Sony digicam etc)
Some would argue HDDVD had as good or better characteristics as BluRay, and Sony abused their market position to push an inferior product. I don't really agree with that since they were both about the same, and I'd rather have 1 standard than 2 at the end of the day.

Memstick is and always has been a complete waste. It is a Sony only proprietary card that has no business in the market place. There were always equal (if not better) options, it is simply Sony releasing a proprietary format just for the sake of doing so. This type of fragmentation with for no reason always hurts the consumer.


By retrospooty on 5/23/2011 11:15:47 AM , Rating: 5
That and Sony has a long history of pushing proprietary standards, starting with Betamax vs VHS back in the 80's. They have always been a thorn in the side of the tech industry, slowing progress and pushing non-compliant standards. Blue ray was at least an example of them getting "some" other comanies on board of their standard. Without Sony, we would have had cheap HD-DVD players 2 years earlier than we had them, becasue of Sony's behind the scenes wrangling.

Sony exemplifies corporate arrogance at its best.


By Mitch101 on 5/23/2011 12:56:50 PM , Rating: 2
Karma's a B-I-A-T-C-H.

Sony Swings to Big Loss After Natural Disasters
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/24/technology/24son...


RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By Burnc4 on 5/23/2011 5:31:03 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Sony exemplifies corporate arrogance at its best.


I think Apple would give them a run for their money


RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By Samus on 5/23/2011 6:16:00 PM , Rating: 5
HD-DVD was simple and cheap, while offering the same quality.

The dual-disc/backwards compatibility feature alone should have been the feature that made it win the format war.

Bluray has ridiculously complex DRM, the discs are riddled with advertisements, the Java implementation had been buggy since the beginning, and LiveBD is such crap it's almost like a joke coming from the 'professional' MPAA.

Bluray has offered nothing benificial to consumers over HD-DVD except higher prices, less compatibility, longer load times, and complex DRM, that, like most DRM, just backfires and hurts the average-joe.

Sony hasn't made a quality stand-out product in over a decade. Like the RIAA/MPAA, they are dinosaurs.


By sleepeeg3 on 5/24/2011 1:16:51 AM , Rating: 5
Blu-Ray offers 67% more space than HD-DVD did, which potentially allows longer movies and more extras. Adding an extra laser to a Blu-Ray player for backward compatibility with DVD is not really a big deal.

Am I a fan of Sony? No, but the war is over - move along.


By tastyratz on 5/24/2011 6:08:19 PM , Rating: 2
absolutely, I guess he did not get the memo that hddvd sucked.
Hddvd held less data which made it suck, and while it was touted as cheaper due to not needed sony licenses and the ability for dvd production to just be retooled for hdvd... we never saw it.

At the end of the day hddvd was the same exact price because they got greedy, it was not introduced early enough and having the support of major backers like sony makes a product sell... even though Sony happened to have made the proprietary standard this time. This is not the betamax vs vhs scenario because betamax was much better than vhs. Bluray is better than hddvd... and while hddvd pushed a gazillion layers to catch up it never would have happened in practice. video = compression and more space = win every time. Even if sony did not introduce bluray and had been a neutral player hddvd would have won.

I wish hddvd DID get released earlier and with a more realistic aggressively low pricing. At the end of the day I still can not realistically purchase blank optical media with a higher capacity than dvd for a reasonably competitive cost per gb... not even close.


By icanhascpu on 5/24/2011 2:30:38 AM , Rating: 2
Agree, except Apple actually does good things for consumers in terms of competition. Sony just screws then customers and rides on the tails of their earlier management.


RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By tng on 5/23/2011 11:36:18 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Some would argue HDDVD had as good or better characteristics as BluRay, and Sony abused their market position to push an inferior product. I don't really agree with that since they were both about the same, and I'd rather have 1 standard than 2 at the end of the day.
HDDVD was better in the fact that it was a whole new standard for HD encoding meant to get around allot of the issues in HD encoding, BD uses a modified version of what was already used (H264?) and carried all of the issues with it.

That said, the quality of the product is not what won BD it's place, but Sony paying studios hundreds of millions to switch and/or not even try HDDVD. While business at that level is cut throat, Sony was very slimy in the whole thing and maybe they are getting what they deserve


By adiposity on 5/23/2011 1:07:11 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
HDDVD was better in the fact that it was a whole new standard for HD encoding meant to get around allot of the issues in HD encoding, BD uses a modified version of what was already used (H264?) and carried all of the issues with it.


Are you talking about the codec? HD-DVD uses VC-1, h.264/AVC, or MPEG2. Blu-ray uses VC-1, h.264/AVC, or MPEG2.

quote:
That said, the quality of the product is not what won BD it's place, but Sony paying studios hundreds of millions to switch and/or not even try HDDVD.


What you say may be true. Dreamworks and Paramount are suspected of being paid off when they switched to HD-DVD. Warner is suspected of being paid off to switch to Blu-ray (though they deny it). In the end, a lot of us were just relieved somebody got paid off so the format war could end. Apparently, Sony was paying more, but both camps were trying to buy their way into dominance.


RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By tng on 5/23/2011 2:52:01 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Are you talking about the codec? HD-DVD uses VC-1, h.264/AVC, or MPEG2. Blu-ray uses VC-1, h.264/AVC, or MPEG2.
Yes I was...Read this from Amir Majidimehr Corporate Vice President of the Consumer Media Technology Group at Microsoft when the format war was on.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&&#post9931...

You make it sound as though both discs started off with the same format, they didn't. If they both used the same format, why bother?


By adiposity on 5/23/2011 3:18:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yes I was...Read this from Amir Majidimehr Corporate Vice President of the Consumer Media Technology Group at Microsoft when the format war was on.


Your link doesn't work.

quote:
You make it sound as though both discs started off with the same format, they didn't. If they both used the same format, why bother?


The war was over the disc, mostly. There was also some squabbling over using HDi/iHD or Java. The formats were an issue, but the Blu-Ray consortium nullified that issue by making all the HD-DVDs codecs mandatory on Blu-Ray. VC-1, for example, became mandatory in 2004:

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2004/sep0...


RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By tng on 5/23/2011 4:10:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The war was over the disc, mostly.

Suppose so.

quote:
There was also some squabbling over using HDi/iHD or Java. The formats were an issue....


This is what I remember the most about it.

Here is the link again, hopefully it works this time

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=99...


By adiposity on 5/24/2011 4:01:37 PM , Rating: 2
It worked this time. I notice that this was posted in 2007, but VC-1 became a mandatory codec on Blu-ray in 2004.

Thus, even though this thread makes some very interesting points and analysis, the fact remains that VC-1 has been supported on Blu-ray since long before (~2004) the "war" began taking place in Walmarts and Targets (~2006).


By Strunf on 5/23/2011 1:56:31 PM , Rating: 2
hmm Blu-ray had higher transfer rates and higher storage space... I'm quite happy to have dual-layer Blu-ray movies instead of having to switch discs half way through the movie.


RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By BansheeX on 5/23/2011 4:06:32 PM , Rating: 2
You would argue that HDDVD was better? Blu-ray has far more storage per layer (66%) and far better scratch protection than DVD or HDDVD. Blu-Ray's DRM was also defeated in short order. Given that it's likely the final consumer disc format, these advantages were far more important than getting $50 players two years sooner.


RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By tng on 5/23/2011 5:33:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
...far better scratch protection than DVD or HDDVD.

Was this an issue really? Can't say that I slide my discs of any kind around so they get scratched. Seen people who do it and they wouldn't play anymore (always something they did, of course it was never their fault)

quote:
Blu-Ray's DRM was also defeated in short order.
Would have happened to either format. I also argue that as to the storage issue, if HDDVD had one this would have been resolved as well.


By tng on 5/23/2011 5:43:55 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, got rated down for that?


RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By tayb on 5/23/2011 10:33:23 PM , Rating: 3
You are exaggerating everything you just wrote. Blu-ray had an advantage in storage capacity but it wasn't 60% and it was a pointless lead anyways. HD-DVD was making improvements to disk capacity and in fact had announced a 50GB disk before the format was killed. Not that it mattered because even at 25GB there was plenty of space to fit a movie.

Scratch protection? Seriously? Put your disk back in the case. Problem solved.

Bottom line is that HD-DVD had unmatched (to this day) features and far better pricing. Storage capacity would have been negligible down the line as both technologies matured. The consumer lost in this format war as Sony abused its market position to push an inferior format on us.


By nikon133 on 5/23/2011 6:47:30 PM , Rating: 1
Pray tell how's HDDVD as good or better than BRD - last time I checked, BRD was superior on pretty much every aspect.

Sony does have strong position in that market segment, but not the one that cannot be beaten - their Betamax was beaten by inferior VHS, back at the time. It seems to me HDDVD coalition didn't really put good fight at all - like, maybe, including HDDVD in Xbox360 - "small" things like that.


RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By tayb on 5/23/2011 10:26:05 PM , Rating: 2
HD-DVD had more features than blu-ray, matched it's capacity when it was terminated, and was 30% the cost of a comparable BD setup.

Hell HD-DVD had HD-DVD/DVD combo discs (on the same double sided disc) and BD STILL does not have that. It was a better format for the consumers hands down.


By sleepeeg3 on 5/24/2011 1:29:51 AM , Rating: 1
HD-DVD never matched BRD's capacity. Quit spouting lies.


By BansheeX on 5/25/2011 4:36:20 AM , Rating: 1
You are a complete idiot. Maximum BD capacity per layer is 25GB. HDDVD is 15GB per layer. What "features" does one disc format have over another? It stores effing data. The more data, the more room you have for features without compromising the main feature's bitrate.


RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By Motoman on 5/23/2011 10:48:11 AM , Rating: 4
The DRM on BD is a massive burn on the consumer...which is why many BD disks won't play on many BD players, and why your player needs an internet connection to keep getting firmware updates.

DRM is, in and of itself, a crime against all consumers everywhere - and Sony is at the bleeding edge of inflicting this disease upon us.


RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By Motoman on 5/23/2011 12:45:18 PM , Rating: 2
...who the hell rated that down? Are there actually consumers out there that *like* DRM?


By Conner on 5/23/2011 1:16:05 PM , Rating: 1
im with you. show yourself coward!


By Yoshino Kurokawa on 5/23/2011 1:51:24 PM , Rating: 3
I don't like DRM at all. It's just that Sony isn't the only company that has used, or is still using DRM. So that comment is incendiary as well as ignorant.


By Motoman on 5/24/2011 10:51:51 AM , Rating: 3
Um, no. BD is Sony's baby. And you can make a considerably strong argument for Sony being the worst abuser of the consumer with DRM - for example, AFAIK they are the only major company that actually was so low as to install root kits on people's PCs.

My comment was well-informed...and if it's incendiary, it's because Sony lit the fuse and threw the bomb. At us.


RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By BansheeX on 5/24/2011 12:32:42 AM , Rating: 2
And this is probably coming from a 360 user whose console, just like the PS3, uses massive DRM and firmware updates to prevent game backups. BD movie backups are easy by comparison.

And I guarantee you it's not all the manufacturers' idea. Studios pressure the manufacturers to "protect" them from piracy for the duration of the product's popularity, so the manufacturers have to compete on those demands. Instead of placing the blame solely on Sony, you should blame the music and game publishers.


By Motoman on 5/24/2011 10:54:12 AM , Rating: 2
Nope. Don't have a 360. I have a Wii though...which can't play BDs anyway, so moot point.

You are correct to point out that the entire industry is to blame for DRM. However, as I pointed out before, BD was Sony's baby, and you can make a pretty strong argument for Sony being the worst abuser of consumers with it's over-the-top DRM tactics (like root kits).


By Reclaimer77 on 5/23/2011 2:26:43 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
How as Blu-Ray a burn on the customer?


Not now, but at release and for about a year after, Sony deliberately kept the prices of set-top Blu Ray players extremely high in order to sell more Playstation3's. That's just shady market manipulation.


By JasonMick (blog) on 5/23/2011 10:14:59 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
However, Sony is one of the most arrogant tech companies in the world. How many times have they burned the consumer (Blu-ray, Rootkit, MemoryStick, PS3 Homebrew, etc.)?

The true victims are the poor customers who trusted Sony.


Agreed. One of the big lessons here is to not display arrogance towards those who programming and security skills are your equal or better.

Your comment was a bit over general (I don't know how much I agree about your Blu-Ray and MemoryStick part), but when it comes to homebrews on the PS3, the open source community tried to reach out to Sony and convince it to leave in a route to preserve their work.

But Sony was adamant into stomping out the platform it created for the console in the first place. And Sony sued one of the highest profile and most beloved hardware hackers, George "GeoHot" Hotz for publishing the console's root keys and a jailbreak procedure.

In the end, much like Nick Denton's harassment of the hackers of Anonymous cost his sites' and his users' privacy, Sony's arrogance towards hackers has proved financially disastrous.

Companies need to remember it doesn't matter how "bad" or "evil" they think hackers are, at the end of the day, if those hackers despise your company due to your actions and have the talent to break your defenses, that's all that matters.

Punishments may eventually be dealt out, but that will be far too late to salvage Sony's bottom line.


RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By cpeter38 on 5/23/2011 11:45:10 AM , Rating: 3
Specific issues:

Blu-ray - 1.) the DRM issue mentioned above. 2.) Cost - $9 licensing fee per read only player; $0.11 licensing fee per read only disk (more for recording units/disks); 3.) Licensing complexity - they are still working on a one stop shop http://www.cyberlink.com/prog/company/press-news-c... for licensing

MemoryStick - 1.) Proprietary (compatibility issues) 2.) Licensing costs

Sony has used their dominant market position to force the adoption of these proprietary formats. This makes sense for Sony. They derive a significant amount of income from the licensing fees. Unfortunately, the consumer does not get a significantly superior product for the increased costs. Was Blu-ray significantly better than HD-DVD (when they were first launched)? Would you argue that MemoryStick or MemoryStickPro is significantly superior to SD?


By Yoshino Kurokawa on 5/23/2011 1:48:11 PM , Rating: 2
So - how does this differ from the rest of the industry? I can name at least a dozen companies that employ some sort of proprietary identity, DRM and/or licensing tripe at this point - not to mention the last decade.

Can't single out Sony on this if you're not willing to employ equal weight to all players, as it sounds less an opinion than one looking to add his fire to the riot. Let's have some issues specific to Sony before you light the funeral pyre - eh?


By tng on 5/23/2011 3:05:33 PM , Rating: 1
Yes there are other companies out there that do these things, the problem is that virtually none of these companies (with the exception of Apple) are so in your face with them.

Sony has frankly screwed itself with the PS3 Homebrew, here it is, now it is not and we will prosecute attitude....


RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By Conner on 5/23/2011 1:21:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Hacking is illegal. I don't like this statement because it seems you are giving legitimacy to these "hacking communities".

and Robin Hood was a tyrant.....

Not everything is cut-and-dry. I'm for people governed by people, not EULAs!


By liem107 on 5/23/2011 4:20:18 PM , Rating: 2
Nothing is a clear cut but maybe Robin did not resell users personnal details and credit cards details for his personnal enrichment...but how in this case did the hacking benefit to sony s clients? This hacking is purely criminal and this is a clear cut.


RE: I would normally feel sympathy for the company
By Chaser on 5/23/2011 4:33:50 PM , Rating: 2
I own a PS3. And I'm miserable. As of today it can only play games, show movies, and stream my media. I expected much more from their product. Clearly I was hoodwinked if not completely mislead. Please give me your deepest sympathies.


By sleepeeg3 on 5/24/2011 1:33:30 AM , Rating: 2
You have my condolences.

I too made the mistake of purchasing a 160GB PS3 today. It is only a matter of time before the planets align again and my world ends.

On the other hand, I probably won't be making any purchases on the PSN for a few months, lol!


By gorehound on 5/23/2011 4:44:48 PM , Rating: 2
i do not have any sympathy for Sony.
I do feel bad for it's customers.
sony is one evil company.


By Phoque on 5/23/2011 7:01:27 PM , Rating: 2
.
quote:
Sony is one of the most arrogant tech companies in the world.


If 'arrogant' had a soul, it would probably feel pale and deprecated in comparison to Sony.


By chick0n on 5/24/2011 12:38:34 AM , Rating: 2
if Sony is the most arrogant tech company in the world, then what position Apple is in ?

get a fuxking clue. moron.


SQL injection is FAR older than 2005
By Sivar on 5/23/2011 10:27:24 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
The attack was accomplished via an SQL Injection attack, a type of attack that first originated around 2005.

SQL injection is one of the most basic attacks, and has been around far longer than 6 years. 1994 sounds about right.
It is especially prevalent in websites written in PHP and ASP by authors who aren't very security-conscious. Often, all it takes is accepting any user input (e.g. "What is your user name?" "Please select which albums you want to order:") and then placing that user input into a database query without so-called 'sanitizing' it. Here's a simple example:

(Website) "Please enter your login:"
(Website) "Please enter your password:"

(Website source code)

$login = $_POST('login');
$password = $_POST('password');
$sql = "SELECT * WHERE user = $login AND pwd = $password";

// code to run that SQL query

Normally the query is something like, "SELECT * WHERE user=Charles AND pwd=ABC123", but if the hacker knows even basic SQL, he can put something in the user name or password string that is interpreted as another SQL command by the database:

password = a';SELECT * FROM users WHERE 't' = 't"

The semicolon is interpreted as "Here's a new SQL command", so the SQL is interpreted something like this:

"Return all users with the name "Charles" and the password "a" and, oh by the way, list the entire contents of the users table."

With a few guesses as to what the user table is named, or using a query which lists all tables, it can be easy to have the website accidentally spit out the entire user database.

Modern SQL injection is usually harder than this, but considering Sony's track record, this example is probably about right.




By JasonMick (blog) on 5/23/2011 10:39:56 AM , Rating: 2
Good point on the date... fixed that...

Nice example too!


Whats wrong with the world in a nutshell...
By Treckin on 5/23/2011 11:14:28 AM , Rating: 2
Sony has taken a harder hit from the PSN hack then BP took from the oil spill in the Gulf.




By gamerk2 on 5/23/2011 12:34:05 PM , Rating: 3
Especially since Sony doesn't have a liability limit of $75 Million like BP does :P

BTW: Sony lost $3.2 Billion that quarter. Just announced.


sony really fraked up this time....
By ghost55 on 5/23/2011 11:23:14 AM , Rating: 4
It is impossible to build a perfectly secure system, and Sony has angered thousands of people over this. There is nothing more dangerous on the internet then an army of pissed off nerds, and Sony has really pissed some people off. Anonymous said the Sony "you walked up to the hornet's nest and stuck your penis in it," and that's not far from the truth. From here on out, its not going to get any better for Sony; its just going to be a shit storm of one hack after another.




Enough Already!
By Uncle Buck on 5/23/2011 3:05:49 PM , Rating: 2
In the end, all this really sucks for the consumer and gamer. The hackers suck and their actions have not only made it uncomfortable for Sony, but for the millions of people who did nothing but want to game online. You don't like Sony's product, don't buy it. Enough of the hacking crap since it's the innocent gamers and consumers that get hassled with having to cancel cards, change all passwords, i mean really, let's move on.




RE: Enough Already!
By tng on 5/23/2011 5:40:12 PM , Rating: 2
Hackers are a self important lot, I have seen a bit on here that Sony brought this on themselves since they got rid of the PS3 homebrew stuff, but this goes way beyond payback for that.


I can't help but laugh...
By BigToque on 5/23/2011 11:14:39 AM , Rating: 2
All my information was likely stolen from the PSN, but I can't help but laugh. Sony deserves this.

The only thing I hope is that the people who are responsible for the breaches aren't actually using the data for anything malicious but rather just going after the things that might actually cause this company to squirm.




"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki