The Old Sony Megathread

[Vamp]

Im pretty much agreeing with what you say except I would add that although we signed up for PSN with faith sony had security that couldnt be beat, I think the fact its taking sony this long to find and fix the problem is that sony had that exact same faith.

Isn't that a good thing though? If Sony could find the hole in their security in five minutes, wouldn't that be more worrying?

That's a fair point, but they're also the fifth largest media conglomerate in the world - the fact that anyone could break their security is worrying enough. The "faith" that it was secure enough isn't what I expect from a company of anything like this size - they should be doing all that it is physically possible to do to prevent this kind of thing. And while obviously we don't know exactly what Sony did or didn't do, I think it's not too much of a stretch to say that their security wasn't quite as good as it should have been.

Combined with their complete lack of customer relations after the fact - I refuse to believe that they only just discovered gamers might have lost personal data, when they've been looking at the problem for over a week - I think it's fair to say there are still questions that they need to answer.

I've been having this conversation on another forum actually. I agree that Sony were piss poor in how late their response was, although I know little about security holes so I'm less sure of saying whether they only just discovered it or not, but I don't really blame them so much for being hacked. We've seen the way things have been going lately and I kind of have the opinion that it was going to happen to somebody and it could have probably been almost anybody. It just happened to by Sony. Apparently because they pissed some people off about an OS but whatever. I'm not really convinced that was the sole reason they did it. If they did rationalise it with that then they probably wanted to do something like thisanyway and its just the excuse.

Minds you I also suggested on the other forum that it's becomming common sense to have a seperate account for the internet. Which I truely do believe. I get why people don't bother, it seems lame, you don't really think about it and people are genuinely lazy but it would make you more secure. To me that's the same logic as saying Sony should have been more prepared for this. This was going to happen somewhere, and so getting a seperate account would be people's individual way of getting more prepared for this. But I get the feeling I'm in the minority with that view. In fact I'm starting to feel like I'm being really lame and stupid for thinking that way.

[Meacon Keaton]

You want people to get a seperate bank account for things they buy through PSN?

[Skummy]

I agree that it makes sense to have multiple account names/passwords for different areas of the internet - however I don't feel that increased security should be the burden of the consumer, it should be the responsibility of the corporation - in this case Sony - to ensure that their system is as airtight as it can possibly be, and kept so with regular security updates. It should be up to them to make sure that our data is secure, not up to us to change our password every other day just in case.

I had a similar conversation regarding my online bank account recently - I had to jump through a ridiculous amount of proverbial hoops to get it set up, and then again before I could actually do anything with it, resulting in more phone calls to the bank and visits to my local branch than I've made in years; essentially it was, initially, entirely inefficient, and the exact opposite of what I wanted an online account for. And now I get a letter from the bank saying that they're changing the way it works, and I'm going to have to change a load of my security questions and numbers in order to ensure maximum security.

It shouldn't be my responsibility to change things for it to be "more secure" - beyond having a not-easily-guessed password/security number, and my personal log-in and date of birth or security question or what-have-you, essentially the bare minimum required - why should it be up to me to ensure that my information, stored by them, is secure? Surely that's their responsibility?

It's no different with Sony or anyone else - you give them your information on the understanding that their system is entirely secure. Yes, something like this is unforeseen, but that's when the issue of customer relations comes in, and that's where Sony have massively let themselves down.

[Vamp]

You want people to get a seperate bank account for things they buy through PSN?

I don't want people to have anything. And I don''t really mean just for the PSN, I mean for the internet in general. But then I suppose it depends how much you spend online and how often. I just think its probably more sensible now days to have an account with a certain amount for use on the internet. So that way if any of the places you put your card details into get hacked into you don't stand to lose as much as you would if they had details to your main account. I think having an account for every seperate online thing would be a bit much, more secure I suppose, but certainly I see the sense in having a seperate account for online purchases now days.

I agree that it makes sense to have multiple account names/passwords for different areas of the internet - however I don't feel that increased security should be the burden of the consumer, it should be the responsibility of the corporation - in this case Sony - to ensure that their system is as airtight as it can possibly be, and kept so with regular security updates. It should be up to them to make sure that our data is secure, not up to us to change our password every other day just in case.

I agree that Sony should be as secure as they possibly can, I just think having a seperate online account is a logical step for consumers to take as well. I suppose I think of it as a bit more of a two way street. Sony should be as tight as they can be, but by that same logic I think consumers should probably see the risk of things as they are and take extra steps now. But obviously I'm working on my assumption that this could have happened to almost anybody. If it turned out that Sony's security system was seriously lagging behind everyone else's than it'd be a different matter. I don't really believe that they are.

It shouldn't be my responsibility to change things for it to be "more secure" - beyond having a not-easily-guessed password/security number, and my personal log-in and date of birth or security question or what-have-you, essentially the bare minimum required - why should it be up to me to ensure that my information, stored by them, is secure? Surely that's their responsibility?

It shouldn't be, but then people shouldn't be illegally hacking into this databases. Technology is always changing and so are the crimes we see related to it and so I guess are our choices as consumers. To me having a seperate account for the internet, depending on who you try to open it with and what you what to do with it, isn't that difficult and stops you from potentially losing more money. Its not a complete solution obviously.

It's no different with Sony or anyone else - you give them your information on the understanding that their system is entirely secure. Yes, something like this is unforeseen, but that's when the issue of customer relations comes in, and that's where Sony have massively let themselves down.

Like I say, if Sony did know how bad it was and they didn't tell people until now then they've really fucked up. And really even if they had the vaguest of notions that it could be this bad they should have told people. I'd like to think they didn't but yeah the cynical part of me does believe that it was possibly just their attempt to not tell people until they were certain so it wouldn't look bad on them, which then blew up in their faces. The trying-to-be-more-optimistic-in-general part of me likes to think that it's probably more tricky than that and they might not have known.

Obviously I don't think people should have to do this, in an ideal world they wouldn't, but it seems to me like an increasingly sensible thing to do. Like I say, maybe its just me being lame.

[Plubby]

You know what, it had to happen to some major company, some time, somehow.

I'm not super-bothered by this. If it turns out that they can get to CC details, then i'll deal with it then. For now i'll keep on keepin' on - and keep an eye on my bank balance. I can't really see how there's any point or benefit to outrage. Hackers are pricks, it's a reality we deal with every day.

[zero]

You know what, it had to happen to some major company, some time, somehow.

That's like saying, "you know what, a massive poisoning at a dinner buffet had to happen to a major restaurant chain, sometime, somehow." No, it didn't. It's 2011, we've been doing this internet thing for a long time now, security has been a big part of that. Hasn't happened to Xbox Live, hasn't happened to Amazon, hasn't happened to PayPal, it happened to Sony. And 77 million people are now in danger of identity theft. That's something worthy of outrage and I think the "eh" attitude is coming from people who really don't understand that this is a pretty big deal.

When it comes to where do I go from here, I agree with you, I'm not rushing to cancel my credit cards just yet. And if anyone tries to get into my bank account or use my credit info, they'll be sorely disappointed anyway, but something needs to happen to Sony. Whether it's a massive class action lawsuit or something else, I don't know, but the outrage is warranted and the hammer needs to fall.

[Crybaby Bunting]

It seems the problems aren't just that credit card data and addresses have been leaked, but more that the combination of everything leaking at once has allowed a ridiculous breach of data that could exist beyond just changing your bank account.

I mean think about it, how many of you use the same password for Amazon that you do for something else? If I got your PSN password and your e-mail, there's a good chance that I could run a program to enter the same e-mail/password into hundreds of other sites. Changing your PSN password won't stop this, you'd be forced to change the account passwords for everything that shares your PSN password.

This is quite a big fucking deal to be honest. You just gotta hand it to the 13 year olds whose only reaction seems to be "I wonder if I'm gonna get a free PSN game" rather than "I wonder if my identity has been stolen"

[zero]

Thankfully I use different passwords for just about everything... unfortunately, I have no idea what my PSN password was.

[ChrisSteeleAteMyHamster]

A number of months ago someone hacked my e-mail and ebay accounts and bought a skateboard for £70. At least they tried to. Paypal is actually brilliant and wouldn't let them change the shipping address or anything so they were foiled, then I spoke with ebay and paypal and they sorted it all out for me and I wasn't out of pocket. The idiot was from Spain and changed my ebay shipping address to his so I just handed it over to ebay.

[DMN in the House]

Since I have next to no money, and I'm pretty sure my PSN password is different than anything else, call me when the class action lawsuit happens.

[King Ellis]

I think it already is. But there was another story about a case in California (I think) saying companies could block CAL's so...I dunno.

[Rich]

Last time I bought anything on PSN was with my old credit card so it ain't the end of the world, it's really frustrating, but I use a series of differing passwords and I happen to know that my password for my email is one I use for only the email and one or two other things and the one i use for the PSN is one of the ones I use more frequently but is still not going to be of much use other than hacking in to my ewb account its not even the same as any of my bank or paypal passwords

[EWB's Best Poster.]

Im also unconcerned as far as password and credits go. Ive cancelled my one card as a precaution (though it was the card I ONLY use for PSN so my bank would spot anything right away anyways) and I think the only password it shared was my WoW account which I havent played for a year and a half. So if they want to rez that up, go for it. Poor bastards

[Skummy]

It shouldn't be my responsibility to change things for it to be "more secure" - beyond having a not-easily-guessed password/security number, and my personal log-in and date of birth or security question or what-have-you, essentially the bare minimum required - why should it be up to me to ensure that my information, stored by them, is secure? Surely that's their responsibility?

It shouldn't be, but then people shouldn't be illegally hacking into this databases. Technology is always changing and so are the crimes we see related to it and so I guess are our choices as consumers. To me having a seperate account for the internet, depending on who you try to open it with and what you what to do with it, isn't that difficult and stops you from potentially losing more money. Its not a complete solution obviously.

That's dangerous logic - because there's a risk of a criminal act, potential victims should be forced to take responsibility into their own hands?

[Herr Matzat]

Don´t worry about the passwords you have forgotten, there will be a firmware update that requires you t set a new one anyway.

Because no matter what the motivation is, hacking in to something is illegal.

I did not justify PSN being hacked, i only pointed at the chain of events that might have led to the open door to people that might do real harm.

Sony are not in the wrong for removing a feature from their product. They could remove the fucking disc drive if they wanted to - they designed the fucking thing.

How about i designed your fucking pullover, break into your house, burn a hole in it because you said i could if i designed the fucking thing. It´s bad, it´s terrible, it´s just as shit as amazon deleting the copy 1984 (yes, of all books they chose this one) you bought of your kindel.

If you want to redesign your console without a disc drive than go ahead, do it and sell it as a diferent device. Maybe you actualy do that, call it PSP Go and see it crash and fail. Or maybe you release a PS3 silm that dos not suport Other OS just like you released a new model of the normal PS3 that dos not suport PS2 games - but you do not remove something i worked for, i payed for, i own, from my home.

Lost the culture, the culture lost

Spun our minds and through time

Ignorance has taken over

Yo, we gotta take the power back!

Edited April 28, 2011 by Michael Matzat on a Plane

[SeanDMan]

"Hacking is illegal so fuck those guys" is also entirely absurd from this demographic, who probably hasn't paid for an album since the first days of Napster.

[EWB's Best Poster.]

heh well Im a little older. I take pride in paying for my possessions. No napster for me.

[Rich]

If you want to redesign your console without a disc drive than go ahead, do it and sell it as a diferent device. Maybe you actualy do that, call it PSP Go and see it crash and fail. Or maybe you release a PS3 silm that dos not suport Other OS just like you released a new model of the normal PS3 that dos not suport PS2 games - but you do not remove something i worked for, i payed for, i own, from my home.

But thats the point, you are not consuming this good at one point in time by buying it as a stand alone purchase, its a constantly evolving, continuously consumed good. They (Sony) are the ones who own and maintain the system so that you can continue to enjoy the features that are improved and subsequently released, I mean here in the UK we now get 4od and BBC iplayer which we didn't at first and it has made a difference to how I use my PS3, and I feel allowed me to use it in a way I didn't believe I could use it at first for my own personal enjoyment. I don't see you complaining when they make improvements to the functionality and usability of the console. By your logic of "I worked for, paid for, etc..." then you shouldn't allow your console to update and allow you to use the newer games and software, since that isn't what you paid for, you paid for the old version, not the new one which you have been given for free by Sony.

If you want to use the other operating OS you should have bought a second PS3, connected that up how you want to use it, not allow it to update so you could continue to use that system with out updates and how you intended it to be used, then bought a second one to use for gaming as your "up-to-date" machine, instead you get butt hurt about something that Sony did that I bet 0.01% of its users even remotely give half a shit about. Or even better yet, you want to run Linux or something else? Get a fucking second PC you contemptuous fool.

[TCO]

Just wondering for somebody who doesn't knwo/care enough about Linux and other OSs on the PS3?

Would they make any sort of difference to somebody who's not a complete nerd and just uses the PS3 for playing games and watching internet tv?

[Skummy]

Matzat, Matzat, Matzat....

How about i designed your fucking pullover, break into your house, burn a hole in it because you said i could if i designed the fucking thing.

Right...so, how about all the firmware and software updates, all the free downloaded content, every upgrade that Sony put on there? iPlayer, or whatever German equivalent you might have? All that stuff wasn't on there when you bought it either, so do Sony have no right to have put that on there? How about every time you get an automatic update to any software on your PC? That wasn't there when you paid for it, do they have no right to do that? Or does this only become an issue because boohoo Matzat can't do what he wants all of the time?

OtherOS was removed because it does not make sense for the PS3 to include software that opens it up to modding. Cry about it all you like, but it's not a home computer. It's a games console. You want to run Linux? Run it on your PC. I don't give a shit that I can't run Linux on my Wii, or on my fucking toaster, because that's not what it's for.

It´s bad, it´s terrible, it´s just as shit as amazon deleting the copy 1984 (yes, of all books they chose this one) you bought of your kindel.

Yes, Amazon "chose" to delete 1984. It has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that it, and all the other George Orwell books they removed, had been uploaded illegally by a company who didn't own the publishing rights to the work. But, no, it can't possibly be that, can it? It has to be Evil Capitalist Corporation fucking over poor innocent Matzat again, doesn't it?