Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

PlayStation Network Hack Will Cost Sony $170M

Roblimo posted more than 3 years ago | from the that-has-to-hurt-at-least-a-little dept.

Security 189

alphadogg writes "Sony expects the PlayStation Network hack will cost it $170 million this financial year, it said Monday. Unknown hackers hit the network gaming service for PlayStation 3 consoles in April, penetrating the system and stealing personal information from the roughly 77 million accounts on the PlayStation Network and sister Qriocity service. A second attack was directed at the Sony Online Entertainment network used for PC gaming. Sony responded to the attacks by taking the systems offline." Does the $170 million figure include compensation for PSN subscribers who suffered from the outage?

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Yeah, but they can make it up in volume (4, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#36217756)

All they need to do is add a bunch more PSN subscribers, and they can make it up in monthly subscription fees.

Problem solved. You're welcome, Sony.

Re:Yeah, but they can make it up in volume (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36217792)

Troll? PSN is free. Unless you mean Playstation Plus.

Re:Yeah, but they can make it up in volume (2)

matt_gaia (228110) | more than 3 years ago | (#36217800)

If by adding subscribers, you mean PSN+ subscribers, then yes, they can recoup some money that way.

If you mean regular, old PSN subscribers, then, well.... *facepalm*

Re:Yeah, but they can make it up in volume (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36218508)

If by adding subscribers, you mean PSN+ subscribers, then yes, they can recoup some money that way.

If you mean regular, old PSN subscribers, then, well.... *facepalm*

Then, well... whoooosh

And for Developers/Publishers? (1)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 3 years ago | (#36217808)

All they need to do is add a bunch more PSN subscribers, and they can make it up in monthly subscription fees.

Problem solved. You're welcome, Sony.

And how do you propose they recoup the lost confidence from their developers and publishers [slashdot.org] ?

Re:And for Developers/Publishers? (1)

xMrFishx (1956084) | more than 3 years ago | (#36217842)

Money, mostly. Probably bribes, good marketing (spin) and a bit more money. They might grovel a bit too, but I doubt it.

Re:And for Developers/Publishers? (2)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218000)

And how do you propose they recoup the lost confidence from their developers and publishers?

Another Spiderman movie, and game. It's about the money, screw the 'hearts and minds' BS, and it's Sony, so if you're going to tell me that they are separate companies, put a cork in it :-)

Re:And for Developers/Publishers? (1)

Hultis (1969080) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218254)

Also: how much is it going to cost them to regain the goodwill they lost among users? They've already given away games to make up for their failure (those were surely worth more than 2.21$ per user), but I doubt that's going to cover it. I think the cost of this in the long run will make 170M seem like pocket change...

Re:And for Developers/Publishers? (5, Insightful)

kimvette (919543) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218674)

And how do you propose they recoup the lost confidence from their developers and publishers [slashdot.org]?>

Stop being so evil, for starters.

Sony's motto as of late seems to be: "Do as much evil as possible."

And now they are reaping what they have sown. I don't agree with the script kiddies' actions against Sony (i'm partial to destroying them economically through large-scale boycott) but Sony did have it coming to them. Taking away the OtherOS option (which is fraud; a bait-and-switch move by removing one of the key selling points) and then suing a customer who decided to take the functionality back was probably just the final straw. After installing rootkits (infringing on GPL'd code copyrights in the process) to customers' systems (a felonious act; accessing computer systems without authorization), falsely advertising product, building shoddy product and having some of the worst customer service in existence, are they actually surprised they are the target of script kiddies everywhere?

They invited it through their actions.

Re:And for Developers/Publishers? (2)

CronoCloud (590650) | more than 3 years ago | (#36219214)

Taking away the OtherOS option (which is fraud; a bait-and-switch move by removing one of the key selling points)

OtherOS was never a selling point to the vast majority of PS3 owners who probably never knew you could install Linux on the thing. I say that as someone who DID at one time have YDL on my PS3.

And as well all know, you can still have OtherOS if you want, you just won't be able to access PSN. It's your choice either way.

I'd also wager that most of the people who complain about the removal of OtherOS, never actually used that functionality, or perhaps never even owned a PS3 in the first place.

Re:Yeah, but they can make it up in volume (0)

TheSambassador (1134253) | more than 3 years ago | (#36217832)

Um... what?

PSN is free. It's one of the PS3's main draws... with Xbox you have to pay for a Gold Xbox Live account. They do have "Playstation Plus," a subscription "upgrade," but it's far from necessary and most people don't have it.

Also... how are they going to "add a bunch more PSN subscribers" magically after the PSN's image has been screwed so fantastically? Even my girlfriend had heard of the PSN fiasco. People are (maybe) going to be much more careful with their data now.

Re:Yeah, but they can make it up in volume (5, Insightful)

mlts (1038732) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218052)

I doubt it. Come September, things will be exactly business as usual with the PSN breach completely forgotten about by then.

I also doubt Sony lost much money. They might have lost a little bit handing out subscription time to compensate, as well as hiring some consultants to maybe add an IDS/IPS system in some places. However, realistically, their losses from the PSN breach are negligible, probably less than it costs to do a promotion of a new game.

Call me cynical, but a lot of firms know that they can skimp on security because it doesn't make them money. If they get breached, they make a token effort to "clean it up", and business goes on. It is going to take governments stepping in, and having nasty criminal/civil consequences happen to companies who go lax on internal security for this to ever change.

Re:Yeah, but they can make it up in volume (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218084)

Also... how are they going to "add a bunch more PSN subscribers" magically after the PSN's image has been screwed so fantastically? Even my girlfriend had heard of the PSN fiasco. People are (maybe) going to be much more careful with their data now.

By giving free shit away, as they're doing for existing subscribers. I could well see them printing out voucher codes and packing them in with new PS3s, good for 1 free game. Yes it will cost them money but seeing as these are largely Sony games I'm sure it's a lot less than their face value and probably deductible too in some way as a writeoff.

Re:Yeah, but they can make it up in volume (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#36217906)

More likely LOSE volument. I discovered I don't really need PlayStation Network. I bet other users have also found more productive things they can do (reading, playing solo games, watching hulu.com) during this downtime too.

Re:Yeah, but they can make it up in volume (1)

RobDude (1123541) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218880)

Nobody buys a PlayStation for productivity (except possibly researchers).
Nobody uses the PSN for productivity.

Of course, there are more productive things you can do in place of a recreational activity. But that's the point. Now, if you said people without the PSN found other recreational activities that are MORE FUN, I'd agree, that could be a problem.

Nearly everyone had the opportunity to read books, play solo games and watch hulu/TV before the PSN existed. So the fact that those things still exist aren't a threat to the PSN.

Re:Yeah, but they can make it up in volume (1)

GweeDo (127172) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218716)

How many Zero Dollar per month accounts do they need to equal $170,000,000 again?

Good deal! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36217772)

$2.21 per person, that's not bad!

Re:Good deal! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36217848)

We now know the value of our identity.

Re:Good deal! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36217932)

We now know the value of our identity.

The value of your identity has been known for some time. It's around $20. That's why there are so many offers that are along the lines of "Sign up for our email newsletter and receive a coupon for $20 off your next purchase!"

Re:Good deal! (1)

SmurfButcher Bob (313810) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218086)

Well, if the perps are ever caught, at least we know they can make up for the compromise by giving Sony a pair of iTunes gift certificates.

Cost of lost business (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36217784)

I haven't even bothered using my PS3 for watching Netflix since this happened. They've lost some serious viability as a platform with this blunder.

Re:Cost of lost business (1)

dreemernj (859414) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218526)

Why did you stop using it for Netflix? Some sort of protest?

Only $170M ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36217886)

So apparently credit monitoring for 77 million people only costs about 2 dollars per person for a whole year.

Re:Only $170M ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36217922)

It's only for American customers with accounts, not for all stolen accounts.

Define "suffered from the outage" (4, Insightful)

Whatanut (203397) | more than 3 years ago | (#36217910)

Let's be honest. This is an outage of an entertainment network. I don't think anyone can really claim they suffered due to it not being available. If anything they may have gained by the fact that they did something else.

Now, if you want to argue that people are suffering due to the information loss, I'll go with that one. But not from the outage itself.

Re:Define "suffered from the outage" (0)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218118)

Not everybody lives in your ivory tower above such petty base past times as playing games. I'm sure what you do for entertainment is so much more worthwhile and enriching.

But yes, I think having your credit card number stolen counts as suffering regardless of what your opinion of gaming is. So on that, I guess we agree. That greater suffering certainly exists is neither here nor there. It's not a competition.

Re:Define "suffered from the outage" (4, Insightful)

Blackwulf (34848) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218436)

I imagine publishers that make their living selling downloadable games on PSN suffered from this outage in a highly economic way.

Re:Define "suffered from the outage" (1)

dreemernj (859414) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218664)

The developers are a different story, but I just want to point out that the OP was talking about the line:

Does the $170 million figure include compensation for PSN subscribers who suffered from the outage?

For the subscribers, there wasn't really a huge suffering because of the outage and they were given free games.

The developers are probably pissed. I recall someone from Capcom claimed they were losing millions because of the outage.

Re:Define "suffered from the outage" (2)

Yetihehe (971185) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218558)

Yeah. As soon as PSN got down, bin Laden was shot down too. Maybe those soldiers searching for him just played too much playstation?

Re:Define "suffered from the outage" (3, Informative)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218562)

It's NOT the "Not Available" part that's the problem here... It's the leakage of info that's the real issue. 77 million. At least part of them with credit cards, some of those in the clear in violation of PCI security standards.

Re:Define "suffered from the outage" (1)

dreemernj (859414) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218594)

I thought the free games they gave out were the compensation for the outage.

Compensation is Peanuts (4, Insightful)

Sonny Yatsen (603655) | more than 3 years ago | (#36217926)

Look, the compensation that Sony is giving out in the aftermath of the PSN attack is peanuts. It doesn't cost them a hell of a whole lot to set up. The free two games? Sony already has deals set up with developers to provide "free" games to PSN plus subscribers, the additional cost of a few extra free games to all subscribers (who might not even take advantage of it, since most of these games are ancient and they probably already have it) is marginal, at best. The one month of free PSN+ for subscribers doesn't cost much, either, since it's only a small minority with PSN+ accounts. I'd doubt that the compensation would cost them much more than a few million dollars at best.

Re:Compensation is Peanuts (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36218006)

the free game list sucks. Not impressed.

Re:Compensation is Peanuts (5, Funny)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218042)

Peanuts are expensive. There'll be probably three to the package, like what the airlines serve.. to save weight, of course

Re:Compensation is Peanuts (1)

FFOMelchior (979131) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218058)

Let's not forget that these games are pretty old, and a few of them have sequels out. That sweetens the deal for developers... maybe there are people that haven't tried LittleBigPlanet, but through this, will try it, like it, and buy LittleBigPlanet 2. Personally, I never thought Infamous looked interesting, but now that it's free, my interest is piqued to at least try it. And if I like it, well, the developers could end up scoring a sale of Infamous 2 that they wouldn't have gotten otherwise.

Re:Compensation is Peanuts (1)

CronoCloud (590650) | more than 3 years ago | (#36219260)

Exactly, I've never played LBP or the original Infamous and am going to try them out.

Re:Compensation is Peanuts (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218114)

That's probably true. I still expect people to still be all over the free games which are not bad titles at all.

Re:Compensation is Peanuts (2)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218150)

I'd also say they might be hoping that a few people will decide to continue their PSN+ subscription after they get a free month, so actually Sony might come out ahead on that one. Same goes for the credit monitoring, they probably got a cut rate deal with the credit monitoring company in exchange for Sony basically giving that company your personal information (so they can spam you or else sell on your info) and with the expectation that some people will continue to want monitoring after the first year (at their own cost).

Re:Compensation is Peanuts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36218306)

Look, the compensation that Sony is giving out in the aftermath of the PSN attack is peanuts. It doesn't cost them a hell of a whole lot to set up. The free two games? Sony already has deals set up with developers to provide "free" games to PSN plus subscribers, the additional cost of a few extra free games to all subscribers (who might not even take advantage of it, since most of these games are ancient and they probably already have it) is marginal, at best. The one month of free PSN+ for subscribers doesn't cost much, either, since it's only a small minority with PSN+ accounts. I'd doubt that the compensation would cost them much more than a few million dollars at best.

Wasn't the deal that EVERYONE with PSN accounts got PSN+ subscriptions for 30 days?

So what? (3)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 3 years ago | (#36217956)

How much is this going to cost the people who's credit information was stolen? fuck Sony I don't care how much it will cost them!

Re:So what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36218162)

It'l be dragged out 5 + years past the statue of limitations. Then nothing will happen.

Re:So what? (1)

Anon8---) (1981904) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218680)

Same opinion here. Related to GeoHotz or not they completely deserve it. I'ld love to see Sony fall.

Was it worth it? (4, Interesting)

ArcRiley (737114) | more than 3 years ago | (#36217974)

The real question is whether it would have cost them $170 million to leave the OtherOS feature alone. Lets not forget Sony started the fight with the community by removing a feature originally provided on the hardware that was used heavily by researchers and programmers at home. Then the community found a way to root the PS3, then they patched it, then the root keys were found, then they started blocking rooted consoles from the network, then the network was taken down for everyone.

The community is big, Sony is small, and there are enough fringe elements in the community to make us dangerous as a whole. Hopefully they've learned their lesson and begin behaving in a more cooperative manner with the community, but I have a feeling they're just going to raise the stakes even further.

Re:Was it worth it? (2, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218016)

The community is big, Sony is small

Then why doesn't the community organize to buy 51% of SNE, or at least enough stock to get someone on the board?

Re:Was it worth it? (4, Insightful)

ALeavitt (636946) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218124)

They obviously had someone on board, or OtherOS never would have been available in the first place. Because they had someone on board, they purchased PS3s. Then somebody else made the decision to retroactively remove functionality from the devices that they purchased, and they felt rightly outraged. It shouldn't be necessary to be a stockholder to expect that the consumer devices that you purchase won't be remotely disabled without any recourse in what essentially amounts to a bait-and-switch.

Re:Was it worth it? (1)

DCFusor (1763438) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218872)

No, it was just a bean counter that figured out if they could sell it as also a computer, rather than a gaming device, that they'd be excluded from many sorts of taxes in the EU. That is all. They never had customer interest at heart, other than to help them evade some predatory taxes. Once that was settled, no need for other OS.

As a trader - when things line up this nicely, I go short on things like SNE....and while you probably shouldn't have to do anything or pay attention to not get screwed -- shouldn't isn't a synonym for or descriptive of the reality here.

The phrase "a sucker never gets an even break" wasn't even coined in the current century, after all. It's only getting worse as the sheeple seem to think they can't have an effect on things, and/or are too lazy and careless to even try. In that atmosphere, it's quite profitable to be a con artist -- like SNE.

Re:Was it worth it? (2)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218282)

Because we're rebels, and we don't do things that way. That's the way the man would do it.

Do you want to be the man? I didn't think so.

Re:Was it worth it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36218748)

Do you want to be the man?

No, but I wanna be the guy.

Re:Was it worth it? (1)

makubesu (1910402) | more than 3 years ago | (#36219048)

We must be swift as a coursing river!
With all the force of a great typhoon!
With all the strength of a raging fire
Mysterious as the dark side of the moon

Re:Was it worth it? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36219096)

Then why doesn't the community organize to buy 51% of SNE

I don't think masters ever pay rowdy slaves to work harder, they punish them. It would set a bad precedent to start now.

Re:Was it worth it? (2, Informative)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218034)

"Lets not forget Sony started the fight with the community"

Hmm, I thought the community started the fight by using OtherOS to hack the PS3's security.

Re:Was it worth it? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36218098)

I thought Sony started the fight when they tried to secure for themselves hardware that they did not own.

When trying to talk to the GPU (4, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218200)

No, Sony started the fight by making half the system's RAM off-limits to homebrew. The Other OS hypervisor didn't provide any sort of 3D or 2D acceleration or even a well-defined method to use otherwise unused VRAM as a RAM disk. As I understand it, the only way Geohot and others tried to "hack the PS3's security" before this whole incident was just to try to do basic things with the GPU.

Re:When trying to talk to the GPU (1, Insightful)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218404)

So basically Sony started it by trying to pander to the homebrew crowd. Shame on them for releasing the PS3 at all then.

Hopefully you'll be satisfied when no one will dare make any sort of move that could be viewed as friendly to the homebrew crowd lest they draw similar ire.

Re:When trying to talk to the GPU (3, Insightful)

asdfghjklqwertyuiop (649296) | more than 3 years ago | (#36219252)

I know. How generous and thoughtful of Sony to do something like accept that people should be able to use their own personal private property however they like. They should be nominated for a nobel prize. All those criminals who would do something so heinous as to write their own code should be thrown in jail immediately.

Re:Was it worth it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36218094)

You are just precious! Oh looka da precious little thing.. .er record scratch!!!! STFU. You have no idea what your talking about.

Re:Was it worth it? (1)

matt_gaia (228110) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218164)

No, it wouldn't have cost them $170M to leave OtherOS alone. Hackers at large are still pretty pissed at Sony for taking OtherOS out, but this seems (at least from the reports that came out) that the main crack was more indicative of the organized crime/ID thieves. Granted the two attacks were rather coincidently related, but I think they have about as much correlation as the whole "Video games lead to violence" argument that comes up /. every month or two.
Sony trying to pin this on Anon was rather BS as well (I'd put money on it being a third party using Anon as a scapegoat, but that's my opinion), since they wouldn't really have a need for all of the CC's pulled from the crack. I rather doubt Anon would view computer fraud/ID theft as "lulz".
Hopefully, now that they have the security re-done on the console side, they can figure out how to allow OtherOS back on there without opening up other gaping holes in the system, but I'm not holding my breath.

Re:Was it worth it? (1)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218182)

Baseless speculation. Unless you know something we don't there is no direct evidence that the hack was related to the removal of the other OS feature and not just a criminal act with the sole intention of stealing cash.

Re:Was it worth it? (3, Insightful)

mlts (1038732) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218192)

I think their next step is going to be wringing their hands in front of Congress asking for tougher laws against "hackers". Laws demanding hardware DRM stacks, ACTA, Son-of-ACTA, and other stuff (which have little to do with hacking, but a lot to do with basic free speech.) I'm sure they will be labelling the people who "jailbroke" the PS3 as the same people who stole their credit card data.

Re:Was it worth it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36218408)

Lets not forget Sony started the fight with the community by removing a feature originally provided on the hardware that was used heavily by researchers and programmers at home.

LOL. "researchers". That's funny.

Re:Was it worth it? (1)

Trilkin (2042026) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218790)

Hilarious. [gizmodo.com]

Re:Was it worth it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36219128)

Right... And obviously that's why Sony got hacked. They messed up the Air Force "research". Not to mention, the original quote was "used heavily by researchers and programmers AT HOME".

The boy who never grew up. (0)

westlake (615356) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218954)

The community is big, Sony is small

There are 50 million PS3 consoles out there. 70 millon PSN accounts. 17 million Playstation Home social networking accounts. 8 million MOVE controllers. This is the community that the geek pisses off so easily and it is huge and it is enraged.

there are enough fringe elements in the community to make us dangerous as a whole.

It seems well within the power of the finge elements within the geek community to destroy it as a whole.

The core market for the PS3 is the mddle class family.

The PS3 FAT based HPC cluster is for the research lab on a starvation budget.

The reason the lab is starving is because it can't persuade the middle class to subsidize the services it offers - and passing the costs on to Sony's consumer products and sales divsion doesn't go down any easier.

Which is why - if you have an once of sense - you keep these things under the radar.

The geek has an adolescent's sense of entitlement, self-importance - and invulnerability. He is - in his own mind, at least, Lex Luther and Superman combined. Who could be more anarchic and Libertarian than old Lex?

He is everything the middle class despises on the most elemental - visceral - level.

To forget that for one moment is suicidal.

Re:Was it worth it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36219030)

I think you are mistaken. Sony deploying insecure infrastructure and poor security has no relationship to OtherOS. Vulnerabilities would have been found and exploited, even if Sony was handing out free kittens with every PS3.

Compensation right... (2)

Drethon (1445051) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218004)

I got an e-mail about a free month and a half or something like that on all games I previously held an account on... They going to bring the MxO server back up for a month and a half?

Re:Compensation right... (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218294)

Is the future theft of your data still included for free with that deal though? hehehehe.

What about Sony Music Greece? (1)

esocid (946821) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218010)

A simple SQL injection revealed user info from there, so let's keep that tab open Sony.

Seems "light" (3, Insightful)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218020)

The estimate seems a tad "light". That might be direct costs (compensation, credit monitoring, lost revenue during outage etc), things that can be measured directly. However I'm sure that there is a a huge hidden cost that is not being included. I can't imagine it being anything less than half a billion in related losses. People think security is expensive. Lack of security is even more expensive.

Sony is no longer the paragon of technology they once were in the days of the Walkman.

Re:Seems "light" (1)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218226)

I can't imagine it being anything less than half a billion in related losses.

Really? Please show your work.

I don't disagree that this seems low and probably doesn't include the intangible costs of damage to their reputation, lost opportunity and the like, but I'm not going to pull a number out of thin air.

Re:Seems "light" (1)

DCFusor (1763438) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218944)

Yes, it's light indeed. They don't (and honestly/legally can't) record what we all know will be losses in the future due to this -- we'll see that later on when they make "any" money and need tax losses against it.

You learn these things as a stock trader -- some things get recorded later as a matter of course, usually to "paint the tape", but sometimes just as good business practice as the future isn't as predictable as most seem to think, and loss of reputation sometimes miraculously doesn't matter to companies with short-memory customers -- of which young gamers would be the epitome. And before the Walkman, there was the trinitron TV -- which really was a bigger deal in the consumer electronics business - I worked for a retailer at the time.

This begs the question... (2)

chemicaldave (1776600) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218040)

What would have been the cost to upgrade their system to prevent this in the first place?

Yes, I know some things you cannot predict, but supposing they knew about each vulnerability. How much would it have cost? $170M is a lot of money, but I know that infrastructure changes in big entities can cost a lot of money.

Re:This begs the question... (1)

Jawnn (445279) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218582)

What would have been the cost to upgrade their system to prevent this in the first place?

Less. It's always less, and almost as consistently, the decision makers choose to gamble with security instead of insuring security. "Seven! Line away."

This *raises* the question (1)

traindirector (1001483) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218684)

This does not "beg the question".

For this to beg the question, the scenario would have to be something like:

  1. I ask you: how much will the PlayStation Network hack cost Sony?
  2. You say: Let us assume <fact #1>, <fact #2>, that Sony lost $170M, and <fact #4>
  3. You answer: Therefore, the hack cost Sony $170M.

That is begging the question. What you meant is "This makes me wonder..." or less optimally (because of it doesn't indicate who is doing the questioning) "This raises the question...".

I know people like presenting questions they have as if they're so obvious that the questions are just "begging" all rational beings to be asked, but the phrase has a very specific meaning, so find some other way to present that idea.

identity theft protection? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36218062)

Has anyone received their identity theft protection that they were supposed to have paid for?

Re:identity theft protection? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36218544)

you have to, you know, sign up for it. it's not magically endowed upon you without you doing anything at all.

Re:identity theft protection? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36218806)

Exactly. Emails were supposed to be sent out with some kind of code to sign up with. I have received no such email, but they have set a deadline to sign up by. I guess I should have been more specific: Has anyone received their identity theft protection activation code?

Re:identity theft protection? (1)

Daetrin (576516) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218874)

Sony claimed they would be sending out email about the AllClear identify theft protection service they're planning to offer. I haven't gotten any email from them since the original announcement of the breach, which only contains information about the usual "one free credit report per year" resources which are available to everyone.

Not that much... (2)

chemicaldave (1776600) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218092)

... considering their estimated FY2011 $3.1B loss due to natural disasters.

Future Losses Left Out? (1)

BoRegardless (721219) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218120)

When you figure in the customers who they have finally "turned off" who just won't buy Sony 'anything' anymore, Sony may just have permanently set a backward slide.

It only takes one or two 'hits' from a manufacturer treating a customer badly to cause a consumer to give up on a brand. You hear comments like that all the time.

For me, the rootkit fiasco & a $3000 Sony TV that a bit over a year later had the remote fail and they no longer sold that model of remote was the last straw. Good companies don't do that. My feeling is that Sony has never taken software seriously as evidenced by all the published failures.

Re:Future Losses Left Out? (1)

DCFusor (1763438) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218972)

When most of your customers on a platform are only 13 yr olds who have only been dimly aware of the world for less than half that -- you can get away with more. Daddy just buys what the kids demand.

You see... (1)

Nethemas the Great (909900) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218126)

it does pay to ignore security.

A lucky one, I guess? (1)

indecks (1208854) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218144)

I happened to have changed my PSN password months ago when people would share their accounts with their friends, so I wasn't worried about hackers getting access to my email, or online accounts anywhere else. I did have to cancel my debit card that I had on file with Sony and get a new one, but I was also lucky enough to not have anything charged on the card while it was still active.

Even so, I don't trust Sony's security measures, especially considering what happened with their page to change passwords getting hacked as well. (jeez, lol)

I didn't and currently don't miss or even use PSN. I watch Netflix on one of the many other Netflix capable devices I have (at last count, 5 in my entertainment center alone). Even the couple of games I purchased through PSN before like Final Fantasy VII and Super Street Fighter HD Remix still work so I don't really need PSN anymore.

I honestly don't think Sony will have any issues with PSN (or PSN+) subscribers in the future. There are so many uninformed people out there that have no idea what's been going on that will just sheepishly sign back in when the system is back up.

Re:A lucky one, I guess? (1)

Daetrin (576516) | more than 3 years ago | (#36219074)

Word of advice, don't use a debit card for anything online. In fact ideally you shouldn't use a debit card for anything that doesn't absolutely require it. (For me that's the ATM itself and Arco gas stations which don't take credit cards.)

Unless you've got some amazing deal with a bank that i'm not aware of, debit cards offer little to no fraud protection, if money gets stolen from it you're SOL. With credit cards you can always challenge fraudulent transactions, and the credit card company will watch out for any especially unusual activity for you. (I've had that bite me in the ass a couple times, but they also caught the only case of real fraud i've had so far, so despite some grumbling i'm okay with the false positives.)

Credit cards are great as long as you use them responsibly. Don't ever charge more than you can pay back at the end of the month and you won't have to pay any interest. (You _can_ use them for emergencies as well, though if it will take you more than a month or two to make up the debt you should look into some other form of long term loan with a more reasonable interest rate.) As long as you follow that rule you'll only be putting money on them that you were going to spend anyways, you get free fraud protection, and you can take advantage of the points systems offered by various cards. I've gotten several hundred dollars back that way that i never would have gotten using cash, debit cards or checks.

Worse than 170M$ (1)

lucm (889690) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218146)

The real cost is not 170,000,000.00$, it is 170,000,009.99$ because I was planning to buy Tetris from the PSN and with their lousy security they just lost my business...

That should teach them, and if this is not enougn, I will also not hesitate to send them a strongly worded letter.

Won't cost Sony a dime (4, Insightful)

Fujisawa Sensei (207127) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218156)

The hack won't actually cost them a time.

The compensation will be in the form of a PSN+ subscription. But you will still have to cough up a credit card or something. Then it will be the users responsibility to unsubscribe when the free subscription is up. Most of the Sony lemmings won't notice until the CC bill arrives, then they will already be in the second month of service and have to pay for that too.

So Sony is still going to make money from the deal.

Re:Won't cost Sony a dime (1)

Adam Whisnant (877421) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218838)

Actually, that's not the only thing they're giving out. The "Welcome Back" program includes some choices of free game downloads for 30 days after the Playstation Store finally comes back online. http://www.joystiq.com/2011/05/16/sony-reveals-choice-of-free-game-downloads-in-psn-welcome-back-p/ [joystiq.com] I don't use my PS3 for online anything except Netflix so this didn't affect me one way or the other, and this won't make me forget how mediocre PS3's online services are, but free is free.

Re:Won't cost Sony a dime (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#36219186)

Is it me or is this "verdict" like condemning a dealer to hand out some dope for free in front of schools as his plea bargain?

hmmm (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218174)

Hmmm, I wonder what the cost of a proper IT security system would be? I bet less than $170 million. From what I heard about some of their security issues, the price tag would basically have been "free" for patching some of their blatant holes. I believe also the price tag on top level management pulling their heads out of their asses and stopping kidding themselves about their pathetic state of security would also be $0 because that's pretty intangible and mostly mental lol. Let's hope they still have the budget for that.

They should have never futzed with Hotz (1)

argee (1327877) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218296)

See what they got?

Higt cost a good think in the end (2)

softWare3ngineer (2007302) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218304)

I think the high cost is good thing. It creates a strong business case for security. companies will only take information security seriously when 1. there a very real cost associated 2. the cost of strong information security is less than the costs of loosing information. Earned value to the rescue! [Probability of getting hacked] * [cost of hack (170 million)] [cost of infoSec department]

Re:Higt cost a good think in the end (2)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#36219162)

You may rest assured that this calculation was already done, and the probability was deemed "near zero". Why? Because it's easier to put some idiot on the CSO hotseat than to hire someone who knows what he's doing, pay him accordingly and also hand him a budget high enough that he doesn't quit on the spot again when he notices that he's just hired as the idiot to keep the "guy to fire when shit hits fan" seat from walking away on its own.

What price for a hosed email account? (1)

Rougement (975188) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218336)

I've had my .me email address for over 10 years. I use it everywhere, from shopping sites to forums to friends and family. I used to get little to no spam and all of a sudden I'm getting 15 - 20 junk mails a day and it's getting worse all the time. How much is my time worth to change out my email address on all those sites? How much is it worth to lose the email address I've had for years?

$170MM seems a little low (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36218464)

Having worked in a large corporation where I ran the IT department - as well as all activities related to security, credit cards and PCI - I would have to think that $170MM is a little low. Firstly, if you look at the TJ Maxx credit card loss (about 100MM cards lost), they paid over $40MM to Visa as a penalty. Now you have PSN getting hacked at a similar scale, but US states have more restrictions/penalties when a company loses control of consumer data like this. Then you factor in the cost of being down so long, the cost of all the on-site audits, the cost of remediation, etc, etc. I could be wrong, but I'd have to think this will amount to more than $170MM. I wouldn't want to be Sony's CTO and/or CISO!! I guarantee that person got reamed - if not fired altogether!

oooh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36218622)

A staggering $2.20 for each account they compromised...

Re:oooh (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#36219138)

Not too shabby, considering the CC numbers fetch only a few cents a piece on the black market.

In other news: OtherOS removal costs $170m (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36218690)

Next time maybe they'll leave well enough alone.

I'm tired (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36218736)

Anyone tired of this whole PSN thing? I know I am, I just want it to all go away.

The 170M isn't really caused by the hacks (1)

Riceballsan (816702) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218770)

The 170M is just the cost to hire security consultants to... make the security the way it should have been from day 1, apply security patches and actually put some real security people in the loop. Actual damages were most likely peanuts.

Note to Sony: (1)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36218878)

It would have been far cheaper to just hire qualified staff, and pay them a decent wage.

But of course it includes compensation (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#36219124)

It's that big fat zero at the end of the calculation.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?