# Uber - Today's #1 WORST Corporation



## KmH (Nov 22, 2017)

Why Uber's hacking scandal is worse than all the others

Whenever possible use Lyft, or some other mode of transportation, *instead of Uber* .


----------



## Braineack (Nov 22, 2017)

I disagree hat this was/is worse than Target's breach.

Today's cyber security is a joke.  Most companies are not equipped to deal with security, yet put your private data is for grabs. 

You know how banks deal with hackers?  they reissue you a new CC and never actually solve the problem.


----------



## limr (Nov 22, 2017)

There are many reasons why I will never use Uber. This is just one.


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 22, 2017)

and this ==> New Uber CEO Keeps Finding Horrors at Every Turn


----------



## Overread (Nov 22, 2017)

Payoffs are nothing new in cyber security and it probably doesn't happen as much as we'd fear, but more than we suspect.
Uber I think grew fast because it found a very cheap way to function using new technology and undercutting the competition. However they also appear to have cut a lot of corners on the way. That was probably fine when they were small and were ignored; but as they've grown and become more and more of a major player those lapses in their structure have come back to bite them hard. 
They honestly probable grew too fast for their own good and on practices that don't work in a safe secure manner when rolled out over large areas with large staff numbers (esp as the concept of staff is a bit loose with Uber anyway).


----------



## Braineack (Nov 22, 2017)

Uber is Savannah was a hilarious joke.

I'd still use it over a taxi.


----------



## Frank F. (Nov 22, 2017)

Braineack said:


> You know how banks deal with hackers?  they reissue you a new CC and never actually solve the problem.




... they even deny that there might be or might have been a problem, if it suits their case and their lawyers tell them so...


----------



## benhasajeep (Nov 22, 2017)

Had a coworker who drove for Uber in Atlanta on his days off.  He said it was ok for a while.  Definatley met some different people.  But he said you don't make any money.  And they keep changing rates for the drivers.  I just recently asked him about it.  Said he had not driven for a couple months.


----------



## KmH (Nov 22, 2017)

astroNikon said:


> and this ==> New Uber CEO Keeps Finding Horrors at Every Turn


Everything you need to know about Uber right here:  “a lack of corporate responsibility.”

Uber has it set up so Uber drivers can't make much, if any, money.

More trouble for Uber -
Colorado fines Uber $8.9 million for allowing unfit drivers


----------



## limr (Nov 22, 2017)

Laundry list of why Uber sucks:
How Uber Got Here

What it's doing to its drivers... Homeless, assaulted, broke: drivers left behind as Uber promises change at the top

...and its passengers: Lawyer to Uber: Turn over data on rape, assault reports from riders


----------



## Fstop- (Nov 22, 2017)

Ubers business model is simple- put company overhead on to the workers. So uneducated workers driver their car into the ground *then *realize they cannot pay for the overhead of running a car 100,000 miles a year. 

The average Uber driver last about 6-12mo(about the time it takes their car to need more maintenance then they can pay for). After math/overhead the average Uber driver makes about $13. an hour or less.

*Cybersecurity  a massive mess*.... So many companies harvesting as much data as they can and then putting it in very insecure storage or selling it to whoever has a few bucks. 
Most of the populations DOB, SS#, Mother maiden name, etc has already been hacked. 

The latest thing companies are harvesting is location data everywhere you and your family go within 8-10 of accuracy.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Nov 22, 2017)

I'm not sure how they ever thought Uber would work. 

Drivers aren't actually employees and I know from doing home visits for work how necessary good support can be when you're 'out there' on the job. As a passenger taking a ride with some person driving you around in their car could be taking your life in your hands! At least with a cab there's a boss or supervisor and there's a dispatcher so there's some semblance of backup available, the drivers aren't out there taking sole responsibility on their own. 

I'd be just as glad to see Uber go out of business or shape up and function like a cab, bus or transportation company.


----------



## Braineack (Nov 23, 2017)

vintagesnaps said:


> I'd be just as glad to see Uber go out of business or shape up and function like a cab, bus or transportation company.



Yeah, we should back to 1970.  When everything was perfect.


----------



## limr (Nov 23, 2017)

Braineack said:


> vintagesnaps said:
> 
> 
> > I'd be just as glad to see Uber go out of business or shape up and function like a cab, bus or transportation company.
> ...



Yeah, because that's what she means


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 23, 2017)

Uber does not want to work like a cab company.
That is why they have been to court to protect their particular business model and want to define the "Customer" as the "driver" and not as an employee; or more recently as an Independent Contractor.  If they were identified as an employee then a boatload of other costs follow that, which is what they are trying to avoid.

The UK has already caused some major headaches for them ==> Uber loses right to classify UK drivers as self-employed

Some people may say that it helps with employment.  That is true, but it also destroys other peoples employment such as Cab Drivers who have had to drive by other rules while essentially offering the same type of service.


----------



## Braineack (Nov 23, 2017)

let me whip out my old rotary phone and give the old cab company a call!


----------



## Overread (Nov 23, 2017)

Yes cab companies are in it for profit too; but they've got a slew of legislation to protect their workers and customers; Uber was essentially side-stepping a huge block of that via its new approach to business. This let them cream off far more profit and also undercut the competition at the same time. 

New business approaches should be encouraged, but if they come at a significant cost of safety, security and other aspects that we expect of such services then surely we should aim to bring the new business model into proper practice.


Who knows Uber could well survive and implement the same legislation and still come out on top; but they have clearly got to change their entire structure, approach and (I suspect) their attitude toward their business and service


----------



## limr (Nov 23, 2017)

Braineack said:


> let me whip out my old rotary phone and give the old cab company a call!



Go on, continue missing the point.


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 23, 2017)

limr said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> > let me whip out my old rotary phone and give the old cab company a call!
> ...


many cab companies are going towards using an App too using the same methodology, just around Employees of a Cab company.

==> Square Will Replace Meters in Washington Taxis


----------



## Braineack (Nov 23, 2017)

I'm so excited that taxi cabs will start accepting credit cards!  Let me dust off the old Discover card.


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 23, 2017)

Braineack said:


> I'm so excited that taxi cabs will start accepting credit cards!  Let me dust off the old Discover card.


you misread.
They'll accept more than credit cards
they'll accept BitCoin considering Square is now involved with accepting Bitcoin.


----------



## Braineack (Nov 23, 2017)

I heard about this new thing called personal checks, think they'll take those?


----------



## limr (Nov 23, 2017)

Braineack said:


> I heard about this new thing called personal checks, think they'll take those?



Yelling luddite over and over again doesn't make it a valid argument. You continue to make irrelevant snide remarks but have yet to put forth a single actual argument, unless you count, "It's, like, cool and modern."


----------



## Braineack (Nov 23, 2017)

I'm not making arguments; there's no point.


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 23, 2017)

Braineack said:


> I'm so excited that taxi cabs will start accepting credit cards!  Let me dust off the old Discover card.



hey!

i still use my Discover card


----------



## vintagesnaps (Nov 23, 2017)

Geez I don't want to go back that far! lol Of course if a DeLorean showed up... 

My point was this has seemed to have been done in an irresponsible way from the get go. Contracting with people to be out there on their own, that just seems to have been too much of a free for all and left it open to all kinds of problems. 

And Leo, I hadn't read all that kind of stuff, it's been worse than I realized. In my area the problems have been people trying to block cars to prevent the signals getting thru (near the airport, which is a prime area), busy days that all kinds of drivers get in on it so regular drivers don't get many fares or make much, spending time and miles going clear out to a location to drive somebody 3 blocks. 

I thought Bitcoin was on its way out...


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 23, 2017)

Yes they can take electronic checks, just like many banks/credit unions take.
they can also take Apple Pay and the other ones too.

The problem with taxi cabs is they are union based, and organization based.
Uber is attempting to avoid all of that.

Just think if your gov't job was based on an app and anyone out there who wanted to do the job without certification.

Uber is attempting  to bypass any regulation, etc in relation to a "company" and trying to differentiate "ride hailing" from a "taxi"; and thus trying to avoid any regulation (costs); unions, and general costs of having "employee drivers".


----------



## Overread (Nov 23, 2017)

vintagesnaps said:


> I thought Bitcoin was on its way out...



My understanding is its had a big revival and has even caused some graphics cards to have limited stocks as people build mining machines. I think that its essentially the current "get rich quick and free" method being used and likely will until it either folds or gets regulated/legislated.


----------



## pendennis (Nov 23, 2017)

Most of these companies like Target, Uber, and Yahoo, have never taken security very seriously, because security is a very high cost of doing business.  I worked for 38 years for a top five corporation, and the money we spent on security would blow your mind.  At the time I retired, there were 6.5 million attempted outside hacks each month; none successful.  We hired people who spend all their at work time trying to break into our systems.  They even drive around our facilities trying to hack into wireless routers.  You also have to have people who get paid to do "what if" and "how could I" all day.

The most successful security requires both outward and inward facing web sites, and it requires that all data even of the most trite nature, be encoded to outside eyes.  Most folks think that the "HTTPS" prefix is enough to be safe, which is furthest from the truth.

People don't really understand data encryption, anyway.  They have no concepts about the nature of encryption, how the codes are actually created, and just how systems of odd random numbers help in the process.  It is mind bending, but a lot of companies ignore the need.

It literally takes someone with a thief's mindset to help systems become secure.  The CEO's of these companies just don't understand.  They're too focused on marketing and sales.

Even Microsoft wasn't very smart when it came to handling files in their older O/S.  At one time, print files moved un-encrypted from file server, to print server, to printer.  No one ever thought an interruption in the process would be a problem.  We had a need for instant check printing, and the files moved along, un-encrypted.  One day, we asked "what if", and intentionally shut down a server before it could send the file, literally pulling the plug.  It sat on the server, we restarted it stand alone without linkage to the LAN, got into the files and modified a $.01 test check to $1 million.  Needless to say that this caused changes in the entire process, and that Microsoft modified their O/S to create encrypted files from applications.


----------



## pendennis (Nov 23, 2017)

astroNikon said:


> Yes they can take electronic checks, just like many banks/credit unions take.
> they can also take Apple Pay and the other ones too.
> 
> The problem with taxi cabs is they are union based, and organization based.
> ...


Uber has filed an appeal in a California case, where it was ruled that Uber is an employer.  Uber maintains it is only a communication line (for lack of a better term), putting driver and rider together only.

I would guess that as "independent contractors" these drivers only get a 1099, not a W-2.  Since Uber doesn't provide a traditional work place.  But, Uber is not the only one who fights this.  There are a number of employers out there who deny the traditional work model for people who are telemarketers, technicians, and others.  They  can also use this type of arrangement to avoid unemployment compensation claims, and even workers' compensation issues.

This will have to be sorted out at the Federal courts level.  While California likes to be Progressive, interstate commerce is the purview of Congress.


----------



## benhasajeep (Nov 23, 2017)

Overread said:


> vintagesnaps said:
> 
> 
> > I thought Bitcoin was on its way out...
> ...


As of today Bitcoin is at $8,000!  Problem is the big swings.


----------



## katsrevenge (Nov 23, 2017)

Couldn't pay me to get in one of those anyways. No way to tell who is going to pick you up, have heard one too many horror stories.


----------



## rexbobcat (Nov 23, 2017)

astroNikon said:


> limr said:
> 
> 
> > Braineack said:
> ...



But can they compete on price? Where I live, you can take Lyft/Uber for 1/3 the cost of a taxi.


----------



## rexbobcat (Nov 23, 2017)

Overread said:


> vintagesnaps said:
> 
> 
> > I thought Bitcoin was on its way out...
> ...



I think it's other forms of cryptocurrency that is is causing the inflation. Bitcoin is already exuberantly expensive to both mine and buy, however a currency like Ethereum is still cost effective and easier to mine (I think). I'm not sure when Bitcoin will collapse, but there are always new currencies coming up to take its place.


----------



## KmH (Nov 28, 2017)

Add to Uber's list of F'ups and dirty dealings that raise yet more questions about Uber's ethics and corporate culture.
Uber facing federal probe on allegations of espionage


----------



## thereyougo! (Nov 29, 2017)

rexbobcat said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > limr said:
> ...



I'd rather pay full price and know that in the event of an accident, I am protected by the driver's insurance.  Pay peanuts and what do you get?  I won't get in an uber car.


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 29, 2017)

From all the things uber did they also did this .. Interesting.   ==> Uber employed espionage unit to steal rivals’ secrets — is that legal?

And there was good reason why SoftBank undervalues uber ==> Uber’s net loss widened to $1.46 billion last quarter, SoftBank reveals


----------



## rexbobcat (Nov 29, 2017)

thereyougo! said:


> Pay peanuts and what do you get?



I mean, I've never had a good experience in a taxi either. Ranging from terrifying traffic decisions to strange anti-American diatribes and taking the longest possible route while assuming I'm a tourist and don't know any better, I'd rather pay less and take my chances I guess.

Taxi companies can either adapt or die. That's the way of capitalism.

That being said, Uber is a **** company and I try not to use them if I can help it.


----------



## limr (Nov 29, 2017)

Objecting to Uber does not mean praising cabs. There are plenty of things wrong with that system as well, and I avoid cabs when I can. However, if someone is going to go for a ride-share program, at least go for one that isn't so abjectly unethical. There _are_ other options now. One does not have to support rape and fraud just to save a few bucks.

Uber vs. Lyft: This is the ultimate ridesharing app showdown

ETA: No, I don't mean "Choose Lyft" specifically. I'm just saying that Uber has competition now, and if you don't like cabs OR Uber, there are options.


----------



## webestang64 (Nov 29, 2017)

I'm glad I own 4 cars.


----------



## Fstop- (Nov 29, 2017)

pendennis said:


> Uber has filed an appeal in a California case, where it was ruled that Uber is an employer. Uber maintains it is only a communication line (for lack of a better term), putting driver and rider together only.



Uber require drivers to work a certain number of hours. Uber sets the fees drivers get. Uber controls how and when the driver gets paid. Their drivers are employees. Uber is just using drivers as "contractors" so that the drivers take on the overhead, insurance,ect. Uber is just cheating the game and operating and lower costs.

The cost Uber saves is just pushed onto the driver and that's why they only last 6mo-12mo. The time it takes to run a car down and not have the money to maintain it.


----------



## Jamesaz (Nov 29, 2017)

In addition, über doesn't yet have to be profitable, as they can burn venture capital to subsidize operations. When it has to really be a business and make $ I don't see the current model working. Maybe it will change the way some things get done but prices will have to increase and that is, as near as I can tell, the only thing they have going for them.


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 30, 2017)

Uber has a history of trying to evade rules, regulations and authorities.  Hopefully the new CEO will steer them in the correct direction as he's uncovering more stuff that they've done in the past.

Example of an authority bypassing technology
".. Uber’s use of a software tool called Greyball, which the company developed in part to aid entrance into new markets where its service was not permitted. The tool allowed Uber to deploy what was essentially a fake version of its app to evade law enforcement agencies that were cracking down on its service."
 ==> Uber Faces Federal Inquiry Over Use of Greyball Tool to Evade Authorities


----------



## kap55 (Nov 30, 2017)

It is my understanding that Uber's business plan is (and always has been) to eventually be using driverless cars.  The fact that they have to deal with drivers is a short term irritant that they hope will soon be gone.


----------



## Overread (Nov 30, 2017)

kap55 said:


> It is my understanding that Uber's business plan is (and always has been) to eventually be using driverless cars.  The fact that they have to deal with drivers is a short term irritant that they hope will soon be gone.



I honestly don't see driverless cars being a thing for decades yet. 
You might get them in cities sooner, but even then I'd wager they wouldn't take off as fast as some are thinking. People forget how computer pathfinding is still being worked on; to deal with all the random things that can be thrown at a machine even before you add things like pedestrians! 

Also there's a trust element; the train systems are still run with drivers who control the trains themselves. I don't see people trusting machines all that fast (and those fast-adaptors who likely have automatic hoovers in their homes - yeah - they've likely seen the thing bump into a wall ten times; get lost; stuck; do something stupid enough to think twice about having a car on automatic).



If Uber is planning on driverless cars then its one of those "in 30-40 year" pie in the sky plans. They also likely hope that they'll be in a good position to take over by sneaking in with the new tech faster than established firms; plus their business model tends to be one- way with the money so they'd have cash to burn on big investment.


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 30, 2017)

Trying to go driverless was the reason Uber was banned in California for testing driverless technology back in 2016 (one car ran 6 red lights), even though they denied it was driverless, of which they then were found out to be lying as it was driverless.  ==> A self-driving Uber ran a red light last December, contrary to company claims

They essentially, since not buying a permit, was able to skirt having to document any issues of the self driving cars.  Essentially Uber has been trying to be at the bleeding edge, steal technology from other companies, steal drivers, thwart authorities efforts, etc.  You'd think they were a subsidiary of North Korea. lol


----------



## Braineack (Nov 30, 2017)

astroNikon said:


> You'd think they were a subsidiary of North Korea. lol



they don't force children to pull rickshaws, then kill them off if they pick up someone late or take too long or pay them with some rice if they succeed.


----------



## pendennis (Nov 30, 2017)

Fstop- said:


> pendennis said:
> 
> 
> > Uber has filed an appeal in a California case, where it was ruled that Uber is an employer. Uber maintains it is only a communication line (for lack of a better term), putting driver and rider together only.
> ...


My post was merely meant to cite Uber's concept of their driver/Uber relationship.

Uber's not the only company who maintains they don't have employees.  The employer/employee definition has usually meant that the employer provides a workplace; and in some instances equipment, especially those which the employee may not typically have in the tool box.  Auto repair shops are great examples.

"1099" workers are generally independent "contractors".  The hiring company doesn't supply work space, equipment (generally), work clothing, etc.

By their very business model, they believe that they can circumvent the punitive fees, taxes, etc., that governments use to monopolize taxi services.


----------



## limr (Nov 30, 2017)

astroNikon said:


> of which *they then were found out to be lying* as it was driverless.  ==> A self-driving Uber ran a red light last December, contrary to company claims



I'm shocked, SHOCKED!


----------



## Fstop- (Nov 30, 2017)

pendennis said:


> "1099" workers are generally independent "contractors". The hiring company doesn't supply work space, equipment (generally), work clothing, etc.



Their are many more conditions that make a person an employee vs contractor. Two big ones are 
*
How they get paid* - Employees get paid a set price determined by their employer. Contractor bid jobs set their own price on the job or work they are bidding on, the client accepts the bid/price.
*Time*- Employees are expected to work set times or amounts of time. Contractors set their own time they work within project deadlines.


----------



## pendennis (Dec 1, 2017)

Fstop- said:


> pendennis said:
> 
> 
> > "1099" workers are generally independent "contractors". The hiring company doesn't supply work space, equipment (generally), work clothing, etc.
> ...


My response was not a "be all, end all" description of how a "1099" worker was defined.  By contract specifics, projects are all defined within the triple constraints of project management (cost, scope, time).  This subject requires far more study than the mere surface comments a blog allows.


----------



## kap55 (Dec 16, 2017)

astroNikon said:


> From all the things uber did they also did this .. Interesting.   ==> Uber employed espionage unit to steal rivals’ secrets — is that legal?
> 
> And there was good reason why SoftBank undervalues uber ==> Uber’s net loss widened to $1.46 billion last quarter, SoftBank reveals



Just an update to the story posted by astroNikon...

Uber used 'undercover agents'

Things are getting a little out of hand.


----------



## astroNikon (Dec 16, 2017)

kap55 said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > From all the things uber did they also did this .. Interesting.   ==> Uber employed espionage unit to steal rivals’ secrets — is that legal?
> ...


Yeah, read this article
Uber corporate espionage and bribery alleged in ex-employee’s letter


----------



## KmH (Dec 16, 2017)

Did ya'll see the poor guy in Canada Uber tried to charge *$18,000* for an 11 mile Uber ride.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Dec 16, 2017)

Waymo? As in, this is Waymo stupid than Uber?? Maybe this could be the next reality show, Getting in Cars with ____. Fill in the blank with your choice of words like goofballs, nincompoops, etc.


----------



## astroNikon (Dec 20, 2017)

update on EU ruling ==> Uber Loses EU Court Fight as Judges Take Aim at Gig Economy

The good thing is Uber is helping craft the rules for the other ride sharing companies, and solely burdening the expenses to testing gov't regulatory transportation rules.


----------



## KmH (Dec 20, 2017)

The countdown on Uber's well earned demise is tick, tick, ticking along at a faster pace these days.
"Meanwhile, the company continues to lose money and faces a growing roster of well-funded rivals, from Lyft in the U.S., to China’s Didi Chuxing in Asia."


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 21, 2017)

As to the independent contractor status, I used independent Owner Operators to supplement my fleet trucks for 25 years. Despite best efforts by the government to have Owner Operators declared employees it never succeeded and is still in practice today. 

Driverless vehicles are closer than you might think. Las Vegas is in actual use tests of driverless shuttle buses with plans to expand the program. The same buses are also on the campus of the University of Michigan, and Apple has announced plans to use them on campus in the near future.


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 12, 2018)

ran across this article, a very interesting read  ....  Uber’s Secret Tool for Keeping the Cops in the Dark


----------



## Cortian (Jan 12, 2018)

pendennis said:


> Most of these companies like Target, Uber, and Yahoo, have never taken security very seriously, because security is a very high cost of doing business.  I worked for 38 years for a top five corporation, ...


25+ years in IT, myself, with a strong emphasis on network security.  Member pendennis speaks the Truth.  If anything, he's understating the nature and scope of the problem.

Some examples (the guilty anonymous because I don't want to get sued).

I watched a *major* manufacturer gets its corporate email system taken down for two-three days by a virus/worm/trojan.  Did they learn anything from that?  Apparently not, because I watched it happen again, at least once, if not twice more.  (Last I knew they were still using the same vulnerable systems.)

Company for which I consulted had a customer set up a "secure" site to submit invoices.  Problem was the site had no host and domain name associated with its security certificate, which meant the certificate could be entirely bogus and there'd be no way to know.  I alerted them to  this problem.  They insisted the site was secure.

A financial institution was instructing a client of mine on how to use their electronic systems to handle sensitive funds transfers of very large amounts of money.  I was called-in to lend my expertise on what was being presented.  After I politely balked at a couple issues it became clear the customer did not want to be bothered with "trivialities."  When the PHBs were distracted, talking about something-or-another, I leaned over to the bank's IT person and said "You realize what you're asking us  to do compromises our network security, right?"  "Yes," she replied.  "We've told our people that.  They don't care to hear about it."  (That was a *major* financial institution, btw.)

There was a certain identity theft service to which my wife and I used to be subscribed.  On at least three different occasions they exhibited *glaring* lapses in security procedure, the first two times of which I appraised them.  (I'm talking lapses so blindingly obvious you couldn't miss them.  Lapses that would allow an ID theft actor to actually steal somebody's ID theft protection service!)  On the third such lapse I dumped them.

When a customer was experiencing trouble with a major international manufacturer's e-transactions web site (used for orders, billing, invoicing, RFQ, change orders, what-have-you) I found their site's security was rated "F" by a security evaluation service.  The site was _rife_ with glaring security holes.  I poked a message toward their site administration team.  Never received a response.  Last I checked that site still rated "F".

One of the major stock exchanges was distributing a stock ticker application for browsers.  One of the PHBs at a client's wanted to run it.  The firewall was preventing it.  On a whim I called the stock exchange's help desk.  Got myself escalated to Tier 2 support, where the following exchange took place (paraphrased):

"Do you perhaps offer an alternative stock ticker option?"
"No."
"Do you realize that application of yours requires us to compromise our border security to allow it to run"
"Yes, I suppose it does."
"Do you allow such things on _your_ secure network?"
"Yes."
(Incredulous) "Really?  You allow people on computers on your *trading systems network* to arbitrarily install applications that poke holes straight through border security?!?!"
(Horrified tone of voice) "Of course not!"

Yet they insisted their customers do just that.

That's just a few things I've experienced, over the years.


----------



## astroNikon (Jan 12, 2018)

Actually Uber takes security very seriously.  they have the systems and procedures in place to prevent authorities from getting to the data that they want.


----------



## sordnotsword (Jan 13, 2018)

KmH said:


> Why Uber's hacking scandal is worse than all the others
> 
> Whenever possible use Lyft, or some other mode of transportation, *instead of Uber* .


Cyber attacks and data breaches can happen to any company or agency out there. Sony's PlayStation Network, Microsoft's Xbox Live, Sony Pictures, and iCloud are just a few high profile successful hacks/data breaches. A common theme I noticed between a lot of these companies is that the executives don't give their respective IT departments what they need to do what they ask when they bring it their attention. I cant overstate enough that any company we buy products from or use services from can get hacked, even Lyft. In my opinion the worst company when it comes to data breaches is EQUIFAX. Their data breach affected upto 143 million people. That's almost half of the entire US population.


----------



## Cortian (Jan 13, 2018)

sordnotsword said:


> Cyber attacks and data breaches can happen to any company or agency out there. Sony's PlayStation Network, Microsoft's Xbox Live, Sony Pictures, and iCloud are just a few high profile successful hacks/data breaches.


Correction: Apple's iCloud was never "hacked."  Individual accounts were compromised, either as a result of poor password practices or discipline, or from social engineering.



sordnotsword said:


> I cant overstate enough that any company we buy products from or use services from can get hacked, even Lyft.


True.  No network security administrator worth his or her salt _ever_ assumes their network is "safe" or "unhackable."



sordnotsword said:


> In my opinion the worst company when it comes to data breaches is EQUIFAX. Their data breach affected upto 143 million people. That's almost half of the entire US population.


One of the worst, certainly.  But the The $30 billion Social Security hack was very bad, too.


----------



## sordnotsword (Jan 13, 2018)

Cortian said:


> sordnotsword said:
> 
> 
> > Cyber attacks and data breaches can happen to any company or agency out there. Sony's PlayStation Network, Microsoft's Xbox Live, Sony Pictures, and iCloud are just a few high profile successful hacks/data breaches.
> ...


Its not surprising that the iCloud thing was mostly do to bad password practices. It reminds me of when someone says they were hacked but they say that because they were doing things they weren't supposed to, are ashamed of, or they simply forgot their password. The thing that bugs me the blatant naivety of people who defend the companies they purchase goods or services from don't realize( or refuse to) that the company that are defending can and most probably will have the same problem in the future. The reason I put Equifax as the worst company was not only due to the hack but also because of their handling of the aftermath. When the information went public they had a form on their site where you entered you information to see if you were affected and on their site they had one of those agreements posted in fine fine print underneath it. that said if you check on that page you give up your rights to sue them for any damages due to the data breach. So my identity comes up on the dark web or somewhere else, I am screwed unless a court shoots down that contract.  The government getting hacked is a whole nother issue entirely and one that can be worse than any of these companies.


----------

