141
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 18 points 2 years ago

None of the paperwork says what company he worked for, which is strange.

[-] IllNess@infosec.pub 8 points 2 years ago

I didn't notice that. All documentation just refers to the company as "Company-1".

I'm guessing the company made a deal they would cooperate if their name isn't included in.

Not sure how accurate but I found someone with the same name and age in Marlton, NJ on Spokeo.

His two cell phone numbers say "AT&T Mobility". His landline says Verizon. I'm going to guess he worked for AT&T. Could be wrong though.

[-] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 years ago

If it's seems a little shady, probably AT&T.

[-] hoshikarakitaridia@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago

Isn't this also going into cyberattack / responsible disclosure territory? They might be opening themselves up to a class action with this.

[-] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago

Right, I think the clients of the telecom company should know if someone was sim swapping their accounts. Then again, they might have already been told.

[-] MonsiuerPatEBrown@reddthat.com 1 points 2 years ago

According to the article there were five victims. That is not a class actionable deal, methinks.

[-] hoshikarakitaridia@feddit.de 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

If it's only 5 that's true. That said those 5 can file.

Also I'm curious if there is another claim potentially in class action for all other clients whom thid wasn't disclosed to...

this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2024
141 points (99.3% liked)

Security News

3551 readers
4 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS