John McAfee Says Ashley Madison Hack was a Female Insider



  • Softopedia reports on John McAfee's analysis of the Ashley Madison breach and feels that it is certainly and inside job and almost certainly a singular woman who was behind it.



  • I too can make educated guesses - where's the proof.


  • Service Provider

    Forensics never involves proof. That would make it science.



  • @scottalanmiller said:

    Forensics never involves proof. That would make it science.

    OK please explain that one to me.


  • Service Provider

    @Dashrender said:

    @scottalanmiller said:

    Forensics never involves proof. That would make it science.

    OK please explain that one to me.

    Forensics is the research of things that cannot be observed. It's looking at the results to determine how things came to be. It can be pretty accurate, but it can't be proven. Like looking at footprints and guessing who walked there.

    Science, by definition, includes observation. You can guess how things work, but it is not considered science until it is reliably observable.

    Forensics that can be observed turn into science. The two are related, but the need to guess and only guess in the one case and the ability to test and observe in the other is what separates them.



  • Piggy backing on one of the other threads. If it was an insider, how do you think the FTC would have grounds to sue? I don't think there is a way to stop something like this unless no employees have access to the data.


  • Service Provider

    @johnhooks said:

    Piggy backing on one of the other threads. If it was an insider, how do you think the FTC would have grounds to sue? I don't think there is a way to stop something like this unless no employees have access to the data.

    That it is an insider would not itself be reason TO sue or a reason NOT to sue. FTC can sue for noncompetiveness. So if the insider had access because of a lack of proper security, yes they could sue. If security was up to par, no they cannot.



  • @johnhooks said:

    Piggy backing on one of the other threads. If it was an insider, how do you think the FTC would have grounds to sue? I don't think there is a way to stop something like this unless no employees have access to the data.

    Be kind of hard for the FTC to sue a Canadian company.


  • Service Provider

    @PSX_Defector said:

    @johnhooks said:

    Piggy backing on one of the other threads. If it was an insider, how do you think the FTC would have grounds to sue? I don't think there is a way to stop something like this unless no employees have access to the data.

    Be kind of hard for the FTC to sue a Canadian company.

    That, too, would make it hard.

    Canada already sued them last week.



  • @PSX_Defector said:

    @johnhooks said:

    Piggy backing on one of the other threads. If it was an insider, how do you think the FTC would have grounds to sue? I don't think there is a way to stop something like this unless no employees have access to the data.

    Be kind of hard for the FTC to sue a Canadian company.

    Haha good point. It was just a hypothetical about this type of situation.



Looks like your connection to MangoLassi was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.