Gnosis, the spokesperson told Mediaite,
"decided that the Gawkmedia [sic] 'empire' needs to be brought down a peg or two. Our groups mission? We don't have one."
"The hackers also seemed to want to impart a lesson about the
user names and passwords that are a common part of business on the Web," according to The New York Times. "Before
listing the accounts of thousands of people who used the word 'password' as their password, the hackers wrote, 'Maybe naming and shaming you all will encourage you all to use better passwords in the
future? Probably not.'"
How can companies and media outlets better protect themselves from such seemingly anarchic forces? Along with any number technical defenses (starting
with more secure passwords!), Forbes suggests that, "Thumbing your nose at an
entire world's population of crackers [i.e., hackers] is usually a lousy idea."
In response to the incident -- which led to a mass privacy breach and hundreds of thousands of
Twitter accounts being spammed -- "Gawker said it is bringing in an independent security firm to improve security and will continue to work with independent auditors to maintain 'a reliable level of
security,'" according to eWeek.
Perhaps downplaying the threat, Rich Mogull,
chief executive of security company Securosis tells the Guardian that the attacks are "kind of a juvenile thing. It's like spray-painting."
Serious or not, such attacks are very common
and difficult to stop, as long as the hackers have enough time to try to breach the system, Mogull
said. "If someone is determined and knowledgeable, you can't keep them out."
Yeah, I'll comment. I must remind the hackers that it works both ways. They won't feel so gay when their parents go out of business and lose their homes to the stupidity of their children, no matter their age. When the economy goes down the tubes and they don't have the wherewithall to play their stupid games with the rest of us they'll be singing a different tune.