|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 01 2013 @ 02:43 PM EST |
In this case NYT very strongly suspected they would be hacked as
soon as, if not before, they ran the Wen Jiabo story. They warned their
network operator, watched for it to happen and called in outside help.
The reason for the "lengthy" in the headline is because they
allowed the hack to continue, like playing a fish, to be sure who
and where the perpetrators were.
Could NYT have done anything pro-actively to minimise the effects?
PJ suggested in a footnote to an earlier Newspick that p'raps they
should not have been running MS Windows. I observe that here the
intruders were not intent on controlling the NYT website, or using
NYT to DOS somebody else. They simply wanted to read some email
from a few known named users. Who can say hand on heart that Linux
is proof against spearphishing and user level document read access?
At least the NYT know what they're dealing with, and know it will
happen again. The cure, such as it is, is for the NYT to strengthen
its existing business methods and journalistic ethics. Nothing
to do with computer tech.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
