Class Action Lawsuit against Blizzard.

[Surfd]

If Blizzard can be compromised, you can be. No password in the world is going to help you.

It's like trying to argue with kids why they can't have ice cream after dinner. -_-

---------- Post added 2012-11-11 at 12:28 PM ----------



Rest my case.

Now stop spreading nonsense that only the individual is responsible.

It's a mutual relationship.

The level of sheer stupidity you are displaying is reaching critical mass here.

Did you seriously try to compare the breach of sensitive data on a corporate network (such as the Breach of the Blizzard account database) to people getting malware and keyloggers because of bad browsing habits!??! Are you bloody kidding me?

How do you manage to post something that dumb while honestly believeing you are somehow making a logical arguement?!?!

Infracted. - ML

There is a WORLD of difference between what happened to Blizzards servers to result in data compromise, and what happens to the general internet user to result in data compromise.

When a user is compromised, the VAST majority of the time they are effectively GIVING their info away, either by visiting bad sites, clicking phishing email links, or generally doing dumb things. No amount of security will prevent that. That is why most of the people who DO get compromsied without authenticators, end up almost immediately getting compromised AGAIN after they get their account back.

When someone like Blizzard is compromised, it is because someone out there made a concerted effort to attack their systems.

Trying to compare the two is about as dumb as comparing someone being injured because they were Intentionally Attacked, to someone being injured because they walked into an open manhole.

[Mooboy]

I doubt you suffer from dementia, so do try remember what you actually posted.

OK Let me make this simple, because you seem to have problems understanding what's going on.

So explain to me why Blizzard even got compromised before MoP? Your beloved leader -- with blue book in hand -- got compromised requiring all it's NA subscribers to change their password.

I've even bolded the bit that's wrong, because they didn't.

See this link here:

http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/securityupdate.html

I'll quote the important bits:

In the coming days, we'll be prompting players on North American servers to change their secret questions and answers through an automated process

That's not the password.....

As a precaution, however, we recommend that players on North American servers change their password

See that word there, that's recommend, that's not required.

Now I imagine given the way some of your posts are worded that it's a language issue here, but when you say they required everyone in NA to change their password, you are wrong, as I've shown above.

The rest of the rubbish you spout I don't really care about, I just want you to get your facts right.

[Kevyne-Shandris]

The level of sheer stupidity you are displaying is reaching critical mass here.

I understand the concept of mutual relationships and their responsibilities.

Those without something in this fight can understand cutting costs of repairing damage after the fact is good business sense. Businesses do this every day, looking for ways to cut the fat. But for some strange reason, there's people here who support the fat to even grow. Easier to blame the individual and make the authenticators optional, as it's easier to compromise and share accounts...right, Surfd?

[Mooboy]

The level of sheer stupidity you are displaying is reaching critical mass here.

Look at his reply, honestly it's not worth wasting your time on him, you asked him how he could relate someone at home being hacked and a company being hacked and he brings up relationships and fat cutting?

If he can't answer a challenge he pulls something our of his ass unrelated to what's being discussed and carry's on......

The sad part is the signature, he's done this lots, to have 6,000 posts deleted.....can you imagine the sheer amount of irrelevant crap in there!

[Kevyne-Shandris]

Look at his reply, honestly it's not worth wasting your time on him

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an argument made personally against an opponent, instead of against the opponent's argument.^[1]

Pretty tiring to see, especially in the quantities seen on this forum.

[Surfd]

I understand the concept of mutual relationships and their responsibilities.

Those without something in this fight can understand cutting costs of repairing damage after the fact is good business sense. Businesses do this every day, looking for ways to cut the fat. But for some strange reason, there's people here who support the fat to even grow. Easier to blame the individual and make the authenticators optional, as it's easier to compromise and share accounts...right, Surfd?

Except that there is no mutual relationship to discuss here. Blizzard is not obligated to provide you with an authenticator. Blizzard SHOULD NOT be obligated to provide you with an authenticator. The security of YOUR end of the account is YOUR business, not theirs.

And for the love of god, stop trying to obfuscate the dicussion at hand by throwing in irrilevant things every freaking time you post. What does account sharing have to do with ANYTHING we have been talking about in the whole thread.

For that matter, immagine if they did ship a free authenticator to every registerd account: it is not like shipping a free authenticator to everyone would cause the vast majority of them to actually USE them. As the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. I guarantee you the number of people who dont use one because they dont WANT to use one VASTLY out numebers the number of people who dont use one because they cant be arsed to pay the shipping on it or download the app.

Or imagine the very first time they denied someone account restoration because they didnt use the free authenticator that was sent with the box, shit would hit the fan way harder then anything before.

And just imagine if they actually tried to make them mandatory. Want to hazard a guess the kind of damage THAT would do to their bottom line, since you seem to know SO MUCH about good business practices (pro tip, Smart Businesses don't force their consumers to do ANYTHING they might not want to do).

[Noobadin]

Someone who must be new to the internet or very naive.

About as new and naive as you.

You can be perfectly innocent and get compromised. One keylogger. A malicious payload from an innocent looking site. It doesn't matter how well you think you can hide and be free from the junk, they will find a way to compromise your account. Through the backdoor or through the front.

Wow imagine that, you can malware/viruses from innocent looking websites The point I was trying to make is, to lessen your chances of getting them(ad-block/noscript/av/not clicking on the lottery winner from Nigeria). Nothing is a 100% safeguard against getting viruses/malware. Even the all mighty authenticator isn't 100% safeguard to your WoW account.

Blizzard even suffered from the same before MoP. We were all required to change passwords in the mess.

Heaven forbid you have to think up another 8 digit password.

So if Blizzard isn't safe, you're not going to be.

Of course you're not, no computer is 100% safe.

Authenticator is another lock on your account to prevent someone trying to break in, even if a keylogger was on your machine, they still need the numbers from the Authenticator to get in. No numbers Blizzard nabs them for suspicious activity (as they can't have dictionary attacks, either).

I'm well aware of what the purpose of the authenticator is and what its limitations are.

If you're thinking you're helping Blizzard, you are not. You would help Blizzard to fire it's legal staff who believes the price of doing business is keeping them fat, while hundreds of millions of gamers dollars goes up in smoke in legal fees. Help Blizzard using common sense.

I really don't know where you got the impression I was trying to help Blizzard. I would rather people used common sense. If people did that the vast majority of these compromised accounts would never happen.

[Mooboy]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

You actually went there after your last few posts?

It's like trying to argue with kids why they can't have ice cream after dinner

Someone who must be new to the internet or very naive.

I doubt you suffer from dementia, so do try remember what you actually posted.

None of the posts I took those from answered the questions or addressed the points you were quoting, your pointless reply to mine (for example) when I was just showing you what you wrote was wrong.

As to the back and forth between you and Surfd it's like you almost deliberately miss the points he's trying to make and reply with....nothing.

What the hell has fat cutting really got to do with the point he was making that home PC's and business networks are different and that they have different requirements, as in:

Your PC = No requirements by law for the information on it or the security on it
Business PC = Lots of requirements, and massive fines should anything get broken into and real personal information lost (see Sony)

Now go on, say something about costs you can't possibly know to make your point.

[dR-vIce]

do i get this right?

blizzard is sued for giving their customers the possibility to make their accounts safer?

[Surfd]

Kevyne's problem seems to be that he really hasnt got a clue what the actual topic at hand is, hasnt bothered to actually read the article about the lawsuit in question, and is just rambling on throwing out misdirection after obsfuscation in some kind of misguided attempt to make a point....about something. Im not quite sure what, but it's there. Really.

Meanwhile, the rest of us came to grips with the fact that the lawsuit is based on a garbage assumption at around page 4 and have just been chewing the fat over semantics mostly.

[Seezer]

I wonder what the judge is going to think when he finds out that you don't need to buy anything. You can use your phone.

---------- Post added 2012-11-11 at 07:00 PM ----------

If Blizzard can be compromised, you can be. No password in the world is going to help you.

It's like trying to argue with kids why they can't have ice cream after dinner. -_-

---------- Post added 2012-11-11 at 12:28 PM ----------



Rest my case.

Now stop spreading nonsense that only the individual is responsible.

It's a mutual relationship.

You sound like a sheep. Look at your sigs. 6000 posts? Dayum. Do you sleep, eat, and breath wow and blizzard?

[Surfd]

I wonder what the judge is going to think when he finds out that you don't need to buy anything. You can use your phone.

Better question is: what will the judge think when he finds out you dont need an authenticator AT ALL. What with it being completely optional.

[Pete]

there are no laws that say you have to tell your customers that your database was compromised when it comes to your wow account. blizzard has been compromised more than once. they started selling these authenticators because of it

So what about the account holders personal data + billing information on said accounts, they have a responsibility to protect this still, even if they do own the accounts themselves as part of the service

Law varies in different regions but so long as they are trading they have to abide by them

Going back to the original post, I dont have a problem with the authenticators.. its good to have both a phsyical + digital option to offer an extra layer of protection and frankly if your going to invest time into something, why not

Like the guy above said, its completely optional

I wouldn't mind if the other big publishers / releases went with the same thing

I trust banks a hell of alot less.. particularly because all the customer support is outsourced abroad to save money

[Tziva]

Well, I'm sad to do this because it was an interesting thread but now that it's just a few people slapping each over and over again, I think we've reached the end of the line.