98
Citrix faces class-action suit after 36 million users’ data exposed in Xfinity breach
(www.sun-sentinel.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Dec 2023
98 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37696 readers
387 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Fuck both of these companies, but, how can it make sense to sue Citrix for this? The article says they released an advisory and patch for the problem six days prior to when Xfinity says the breach happened, so, it sounds like Xfinity neglected to install their software updates.
Where "promptly" means at least 9 days later. I understand patching production systems isn't just a point and click operation, but vulnerability and patch management is a competency that Comcast is responsible for. The fact that they're not named as a defendant in the suit is really, really weird.
The next day? OK, they're responsible.
A week later, they have no responsibility left. Security holes happen, even in "highly secure" systems, because of how complex they are and how difficult it is to harden every possible edge case. But people not knowing the hole exists when you find and patch it isn't really possible, which is why they give advisories that "this is serious, you need to install it" in the first place. Every day after the patch is shipped increases your risk that bad actors have used the new knowledge to find a way to exploit the vulnerability, not through any failure of the vendor, but by the nature of what security is.
A hole existing isn't negligent. Leaving a known vulnerability, with a shipped fix, unpatched for a week on platforms that hold sensitive consumer information is. And it's a decent ways up the severity scale of negligence, too.