1 MILLION accounts leaked in megahack on banks, websites

page: 3
12
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by SolarIce
 


Well.... no matter what you say or think as to why "Most" hackers do this, you sure as hell can not
guarantee that my 80yr old mother is not going to be wiped out financially or that any of us might be.


Can it be proven that we little people are safe from this particular hacking incident ?

Show me please.

:
edit on 28-8-2012 by azureskys because: fixed word




posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   
If some one is hired to hack to look for weak spots fine
but if they are just doing it to prove a point,then its pure BS. and is Illegal period !



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by BASSPLYR
 

You do realize if the banks go down, so does the value of your money that you hold in your hand. So you could have a wheelbarrow full and it would be worthless. Just take a look at Germany pre-WWII.



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   
great....i am probably going to get hit with yet more fees now on my already overdrafted checking account.

sheesh.

who would i contact to try to persuade them to go after the not-so-poor peeps instead of peeps like me?



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 06:35 PM
link   
This is one of the many reasons why I have my account set up to not be accessible unless it has money in it. Another reason is because I sometimes forget something I paid for. I hate being overdrawn.



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Just don't bank on line and don't use ATM's we do neither but believe me we are pestered to the Nines to bank online with every paper statement we get at the end of the month.

Regards, Iwinder



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Proposed rule seeks to strengthen cyber safeguards



Source


A proposed rule published Aug. 24 by the Defense Department and two other government agencies would require federal contractors to furnish basic safeguards to computer systems that hold government information, reports the Washington Business Journal.


Feds propose rule to hold contractors responsible for cyber safeguards



Linked Source: WBJ


The proposal would require agencies to add a clause to contracts that addresses requirements for "the basic safeguarding of contractor information systems that contain or process information provided by or generated for the Government," other than public information.


The proposal is entitled "Federal Acquisition Regulation; Basic Safeguarding of Contractor Information Systems" "Federal Acquisition Regulation; Basic Safeguarding of Contractor Information Systems"

I would like to think the government would have exercised this precautionary legislation long LONG ago.

Also, I would like to think, since the world they are legislating is virtual, that such protective measures would be automatically assumed by the institutions who consume the "contractor" products and services... and they would apply equally to ALL data, whether it belongs to the government OR a private citizen.

Money is in the mix.... this is bound to be unpleasant. If contractors have to assume additional liability, we are nearing the point of more debt for the nation; because the price of "information" in this virtual world of theirs will go up... and that means they'll tell us the "cost" has gone up and tax us for it.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by g146541
 

Has anyone actually gone bankrupt from someone hacking their account though? I'm not siding either way, just asking. If a banks security measures are easily hacked then the bank takes responsibility unless the account holder is at fault somehow..
edit on 29-8-2012 by igor_ats because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 07:47 AM
link   
Further proof that Anonymous aren't our friends.

They are the enemy and plan to take whatever freedoms we have left away from us.
edit on 29-8-2012 by Junkheap because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by igor_ats
reply to post by g146541
 

Has anyone actually gone bankrupt from someone hacking their account though? I'm not siding either way, just asking. If a banks security measures are easily hacked then the bank takes responsibility unless the account holder is at fault somehow..

I seriously doubt anyone has gone "bankrupt" but how much inconvenience do you want to allow a bank to put on you?
When account discrepancies do show up, the banks want you to bring in all of your account transactions and information and prove to them that you are not robbing them, this can be a pain.
Inevitably if you can prove you are right, yes as far as I know the bank will fix the error.
Sure, not having an account is a hassle at times, like when I want to buy online.
So I go to the store and buy a disposeable visa and pay the 5 bucks for it.
It sure beats having hundreds of negative dollars in an overdrawn account!
It also teaches people to live within their means as we know we do not have a false net there "overdraft"...
Generally unless you have quite a cushion in your account, I remember worrying about my accounts back when.
Since dumping banks, I have not worried in a long time.
Now I can put my hard earned worry into something real, like my kids or home or whatever.
Bankrupt, no.
But extremely inconvenienced yes.
Dump your bank.
We can LIVE without them, they cannot survive without us.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Anonymous is a government psyop. This is a conspiracy. They probably want new antihacking laws to protect us from hackers while destroying internet rights



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Is it at all possible this is a false-flag for internet censorship?



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by ConspiracyBuff
Is it at all possible this is a false-flag for internet censorship?


The possibility is ever-present. Which is why, I think, many people suspect Anonymous is being used as a cover for domestic and international psy-ops.

I won't rule out corporate cyber-warfare however. That's possible too.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by SolarIce
reply to post by Gauss
 





These people are criminals, and they should be persecuted to the fullest extent of the law, and then thrown in Gitmo to rot.


Why? If you know how to make up a good password and you aren't stupid on the internet, you WILL have nothing to worry about...

Sometimes a good hack is just a lesson to be taught, that we rely on technology so much, and put trust into computers, even though it only takes a bit of know how to screw it all up.
Oh and if they should all be put in jail, than so too should the bloody Government, because guess what? they hack as well.....


Do you even KNOW where the original term hack came from? It originally meant to FIX your computer YOURSELF. It didn't originally mean to break into a computer, it merely meant you knew how to beat a computer brain into submission. Also, the fact you put conflicting ideas...like a good password and you have nothing to worry about and then say we need to learn that we put too much trust into computers, even though they are vulnerable to hacking, make me wonder what position you are coming from.

There is a difference between legal and illegal hacking. You can hack your own computer for instance and this IS where it originally came from. But as with everything, some will end up using good things for bad reasons and this is where it goes into the illegal arena.

Originally the illegal hackers were breaking into corporations that had skrewed them out of money - probably an angry laid off developer or something like that? But now they are putting people's private accounts on the line. People who haven't done anything to them. It's ok to HACK your OWN computer but when it comes to illegal hacking ...the little guy (like people with accounts at a company) is the one who suffers the most and has done nothing to deserve it. I'm against illegal hacking and it shouldn't be encouraged at any time.
edit on 29-8-2012 by Opportunia because: clarification
edit on 29-8-2012 by Opportunia because: Clarification



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   
I'm always a little suspicious when something major like this happens just before some Big UN Sponsored Symposium starts up.

The UN wants to control all information and communications technology. They especially want to impose a tax on use of the worldwide web, aka The Internet. They have a Cyber Security Conference coming up in a couple of months.

Read this then remember:

They NEED major security breaches in order to justify whatever it is they are planning to propose.



posted on Aug, 29 2012 @ 08:35 PM
link   
Seems like hackers are the only ones standing up to the big guys these days. Still posting regular peoples stuff online isn't nice. :c



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 06:50 PM
link   
People have been robbing banks since the invention of banks. When the government federally insured every bank deposit, customers of the bank stopped losing money from bank robberies.

There is no federal insurance on lost money from hacked online bank accounts!!!!!!!

You sign a contract with your bank and only SOME banks guarantee to replace lost funds from a hacked online account.

Make the choice to only bank with a legally binding guarantee your deposits will NOT be lost to a breach of security.
Maybe that means you will need 2 bank accounts with more trips to the bank and less convenience; get an offline account for your main stash of funds and a smaller online account with cash you can afford to be uninsured.

Make a conscious choice on YOUR money!





top topics
 
12
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join