29 11 11 - 20:55From an informed source:
Hackers of the old-school type used to claim that they hacked to learn, and when they did break into computers owned by others, they left behind no traces. Rather, they said, the hack was a warning, like a canary in a coal mine, that the system was insecure.
Corporate America has rarely liked this approach. For one thing, it endangers jobs. If the head assistant manager for security finds out his system got hacked by a bunch of 16-year-olds, he looks kind of incompetent. For this reason, individuals at corporations tend to hide rather than publicize hacks. - "AT&T hackers warned of vulnerability, now proven right"
Which would you prefer:
(a) A harmless hack that shows you that indeed, your security sucks
(b) A malicious hack which steals information after you ignore that warning?