On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 02:55:54PM -0400, [email protected] wrote:
> Other than that, I think it's reasonable to assume that either they were
> hacked, or they found it expedient to claim they had been hacked to cover up
> something even more nefarious.

Exactly.  AFAIK, no evidence has yet been produced which substantiates
their claim.  And you know as well as I do that the "Hacker X" claim
has been used by spammers (and others) for many years in order to
provide plausible deniability.

"I find your lack of disclosure...disturbing."

So perhaps they're telling the truth.  Perhaps they're not.  (I find it
useful to always presume that when the word "spokesperson" enter the
conversation, that lying is in progress.  After all, *anyone* could
tell the truth; it takes a well-trained, seasoned professional to lie
convincingly and at length.)

---rsk
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.

Reply via email to