zlacker

[return to "Checkout.com hacked, refuses ransom payment, donates to security labs"]
1. lexlam+65[view] [source] 2025-11-13 10:09:05
>>Strang+(OP)
The donation is more or less virtue signaling rather than actual insight.

The problem can not be helped by research research against cybercrime. Proper practices for protections are well established and known, they just need to be implemented.

The amount donated should've rather be invested into better protections / hiring a person responsible in the company.

(Context: The hack happened on a not properly decomissioned legacy system.)

◧◩
2. varisp+v6[view] [source] 2025-11-13 10:20:08
>>lexlam+65
There is not much to research. If companies want security, they should pay for security.
◧◩◪
3. dspill+Oc[view] [source] 2025-11-13 11:09:26
>>varisp+v6
> If companies want security, they should pay for security.

Or just properly follow best-practise, and their own procedures, internally.⁰

That was the failing here, which in an unusual act of honesty they are taking responsibility for in this matter.

--------

[0] That might be considered paying for security, indirectly, as it means having the resources available to make sure these things are done, and tracked so it can be proven they are done making slips difficult to happen and easy to track & hopefully rectify when they inevitably still do.

[go to top]