For the first time in a long....no...ever....I will have to disagree with Blue on this one.
I think there is a difference between a hacker and a script kiddie/defacer.
I was a "hacker" in the Army. It was a necessary task/skill within my job description.
The reality is a "hacker" in the true sense of the word is not a loser in any way. In fact, (not trying to toot my own horn), but they're very intelligent. It takes a lot of skill and intelligence to do what a hacker does.
Script kiddies on the other hand don't need a lot of knowledge of the way systems work. They do what they do out of pure amusement, and typically are blocked by little more than a period or symbol in your password.
I personally think what has happened is wrong, and WHT has my sympathy and the hacker now has users info (including mine).
What I doubt however is the statement:
"This very deliberate, sophisticated and calculated hack..."
Ok, it's obvious deliberate, and calculated, but I believe the word "sophisticated" was used to make everyone feel that their data would have otherwise been safe. I don't mean to say that they shouldn't make their users feel comfortable, but I have doubts that this was very sophisticated. The process would be as simple as hacking any other site.
Now I absolutely 100% agree that the hacker is to blame, but the truth is, when it comes to something like this, the victim is just as much to blame.
A good analogy, at least in my opinion, would be a sign posted outside of Central Park stating "Females walking in the dark, alone, through Central Park at night, are likely to be victimized." and women reading and ignoring the sign, and then falling victim to a crime in Central Park at night. You feel bad for her, and yes the attacker is to blame, but she knew the consequences of not taking the sign into consideration.
The same goes online. We're in an industry in which hacks are not just normal, but are expected. Having a better handle on prevention, and security auditing rather than coasting by feeling comfortable with what is already in place, is a good place to start, and any serious business model or community online with as many users as WHT has, should be considering this constantly. In fact iNet should have security professionals on staff, who are paid to audit the server/site for security holes constantly.
The fact remains if this was hotmail, gmail, or ms passports, everyone would be blaming those companies for lack of security, and I strongly feel that WHT should be no different.
Do I feel for WHT in this situation....absolutely, but let's be fair in passing responsibility around.
