I'm assuming the customer data didn't include personally identifiable information like a social security number, credit card number, or bank account number. If it did then Apple didn't follow U.S. law in notifying customers of the breach in a timely manner.
One would think in an abundance of caution Apple would have at least sent out password reset notifications to any affected customers.
A corporate network would be separate from a data center network - and for good reason, obviously.
The only corporate information on customers would more than likely be service requests / customer support data, which would mainly be contact information.
When these type of articles appear, I often am unclear about what was actually done by the criminal. This article says: "Australian Federal Police also seized two Apple laptops, and found that the accused had obtained "authorized keys" to access Apple's systems."
So...it would seem the criminal simply obtained some sort of password or keys to access a computer system without proper authorization. I don't see that as "hacking" but just poor management by the owner of the system. To be sure, accessing a computer system without proper authorization (e.g. use of another's password) is a crime in the US.
That sounds like victim blaming taken to a whole new level.
But, in today's world it is sadly often, too often, true.
Our information is often stored on third party servers that we don't even know exist much less have any control over. When it is stolen it is our loss -- not the owner/operator of the server.
The owners of the servers have very little incentive to spend money securing those servers. To them, it is an investment with a zero return. So, they put our data out there at risk.
So is the criminal the guy who hacks into it? Or the owner of the server who didn't secure it adequately?
(And, I am talking generally here -- not about Apple. I feel confident Apple took all responsible precautions.)
When these type of articles appear, I often am unclear about what was actually done by the criminal. This article says: "Australian Federal Police also seized two Apple laptops, and found that the accused had obtained "authorized keys" to access Apple's systems."
So...it would seem the criminal simply obtained some sort of password or keys to access a computer system without proper authorization. I don't see that as "hacking" but just poor management by the owner of the system. To be sure, accessing a computer system without proper authorization (e.g. use of another's password) is a crime in the US.
Exactly! The media generally considers "hacking" to be any kind of unauthorized access. In this instance, it seems the "hacker" basically obtained access to keys or a password, that allowed him to gain access to an Apple corporate account.
Time to hire him! Smart people need to be channeled into good ends, not put in prison. Hire him and keep him occupied by hacking into Russia or doing other state espionage.
When these type of articles appear, I often am unclear about what was actually done by the criminal. This article says: "Australian Federal Police also seized two Apple laptops, and found that the accused had obtained "authorized keys" to access Apple's systems."
So...it would seem the criminal simply obtained some sort of password or keys to access a computer system without proper authorization. I don't see that as "hacking" but just poor management by the owner of the system. To be sure, accessing a computer system without proper authorization (e.g. use of another's password) is a crime in the US.
Exactly! The media generally considers "hacking" to be any kind of unauthorized access. In this instance, it seems the "hacker" basically obtained access to keys or a password, that allowed him to gain access to an Apple corporate account.
The kid is probably a relative or friend of whomever actually owned the laptop(s) and THEY work/worked at Apple.
Time to hire him! Smart people need to be channeled into good ends, not put in prison. Hire him and keep him occupied by hacking into Russia or doing other state espionage.
He should rot in prison for hurting Apple.
He embarrassed Apple, but there's no indication that he actually hurt the company. It seems that the "hack" wasn't so much Mr. Robot or Hackers-style hacking; more like he did some "social hacking" and obtained the keys that got him access to Apples corporate network, which is impressive nonetheless.
I couldn´t agree more with what you said, outside the US, iPhones are not so popular because they are very expensive and a lot of people uses Android chep phones and therefore they use Whats App to comunicate with their contacts.
Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Holland, Austria, Switzerland, Germany, U.K. are not poor; but in those countries people use predominantly whatsapp because everybody has it. Even for school, a lot of students form whatsapp groups to manage their assignments. It's sadly become the standard in western Europe.
Comments
A corporate network would be separate from a data center network - and for good reason, obviously.
The only corporate information on customers would more than likely be service requests / customer support data, which would mainly be contact information.
Exactly! The media generally considers "hacking" to be any kind of unauthorized access. In this instance, it seems the "hacker" basically obtained access to keys or a password, that allowed him to gain access to an Apple corporate account.