Skip to Content
8-05-2008 @ 3:53PM
Mike, before you continue this asinine crusade, speak to a security expert. You're in way over your head here and you're dangerously close to libel. Seriously.
8-05-2008 @ 4:10PM
8-05-2008 @ 5:29PM
I don't disagree that I should talk to a security expert, but before you keep throwing accusations of libel around, you should probably talk to someone trained in journalism. Hey, that's me! How are you?As my journalism professor always said, truth is always a defense against libel. I know three things that are true: 1) This account had an Authenticator on it, 2) this account got hacked, 3) if it happened once, it can happen again. Are you disagreeing with me on any of those things?Nowhere did I say the system is broken -- all I've ever said, in this post or elsewhere, is that the Authenticator provides a good defense, but not an impermeable one. You can't libel someone by telling the truth and that's all I've done so far. Thanks for reading.
8-05-2008 @ 6:18PM
You did NOT say #3."But the fact remains that this person got hacked while using the key (however it was done), and if security can be broken once, it will be broken again."In your glib response (thanks for the invoking the holier-than-thou-because-I'm-a-journalist response without knowing whether I am or not), you said:"if it happened once, it can happen again."There is a world of difference between "will" and "can".But please, keep implying there's something wrong with the authenticators without knowing how they work or even taking a few moments to talk to a security expert to gain even novice understanding. You're doing your readers a real service by spreading this FUD.(Since you have trouble distinguishing between "will" and "can", the previous paragraph was sarcasm. I would hope that with your journalism training you could pick it up, but as you don't know the difference between those words I won't take anything for granted.)
8-05-2008 @ 6:20PM
You're telling the truth but also leaving out certain key details.Befaire also clearly stated that the problem was neither with the Authenticator nor Blizzard's security.If a person had an authenticator and was hacked, but it wasn't the fault of the Authenticator or Blizzard, who does that leave?More importantly, why was that information excluded from your article?
First time? A confirmation email will be sent to you after submitting.
Members enter your username and password.
Enter your AOL or AIM screenname and password.
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.