Hacker Posts Details of 3 Million Iranian Bank Accounts 145
Jeremiah Cornelius writes "Khosrow Zarefarid warned of a security flaw in Iran's banking system providing affected institutions the details, including 1,000 captured bank accounts. When the affected banks, including the largest state institutions didn't respond, Khosrow hacked 3 million accounts across at least 22 banks. He then dropped these details — including card numbers and PINs — on his blog. Three Iranian banks Saderat, Eghtesad Novin, and Saman have already warned customers to change their debit card PINs. 'Zarefarid is reportedly no longer in Iran, though it is unclear when he left.'"
"Zarefarid is reportedly no longer in Iran, though (Score:2)
Re:"Zarefarid is reportedly no longer in Iran, tho (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
...despite the fact that I see no such aggression coming from them. I just think it's interesting.
Yeah and arming hizbullah, hamas and having their fingers deep in both groups along with previously arming the PLO is 'no aggressive action' right.. Oh wait, let me guess the Jews control both groups.
Re:"Zarefarid is reportedly no longer in Iran, tho (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah and arming hizbullah, hamas and having their fingers deep in both groups along with previously arming the PLO is 'no aggressive action' right.. Oh wait, let me guess the Jews control both groups.
Right, it's not like we ever did shit like give the Mujahedin weapons like stinger missiles. We never gave fucking crates full of guns to South American dictators and/or revolutionaries. We never trained people to invade Cuba. We never started something on the order of half a dozen illegal wars in the last 60 years.
Stop fucking talking like America is a shining beacon of justice and freedom, because we are just as shitty as nearly every other goddamned country in the fucking world. We just have better marketing.
Re: (Score:2)
Well that's an american problem, then again you only need to understand the context of those situations too. But I'm sure you don't think that hamas or hizbullah who both agree that slaughtering all civilians and driving the jews are just lies and propaganda despite that their leadership and in some cases their charters have this spelled right out. The only person that thinks America is a shining beacon are the ones that like to gloss the truth. Then again, the majority of people don't realize that the w
Re: (Score:2)
then again you only need to understand the context of those situations too.
It's odd that we need to understand the context when it comes to Western support for "terrorists", but when it comes to non-Western governments supporting "terrorism", then the context isn't important...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have any evidence to the contrary*? There's plenty of evidence supporting that proposition.
Which proposition - that Iran is a "peaceful paradise"?
That doesn't stand to even a cursory examination of the Iranian political system - it's not like they hide the fact that it's based on the (inherently undemocratic) principle of velayat e-faqih - essentially, a theocracy. Or how about death penalty prescribed for homosexuality, or stoning to death for adultery?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not particularly fond of moral relativism. Yes, I do believe that Western countries being democratic and secular and having due process of law and all these things - even if they don't always work 100%, and the implementation is imperfect - makes them better than Iran. Sure, it's my subjective assessment, but I'll stand by it - and so do most other Westerners. I claim moral high ground by my measures and the measures of my society, because there's no higher authority.
Re: (Score:2)
Then you are bound to acknowledge that THEY claim the high ground by THEIR measures and THEIR society.
I do acknowledge that; but, obviously, as far as I'm concerned, their high ground is not as high as mine - which is what matters when it comes to guiding my actions.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't believe that direct military aggression against Iran is warranted at this point. There are plenty worse countries in the world, after all, even in that same region. I just don't see the point in extolling them as some kind of paradise because they're so anti-Western and all. Most things about the modern Western world are good, not bad. Some that are bad, are even worse in Iran (and China etc).
Re: (Score:2)
I'm assuming you haven't spoken to the dead or stoned ones...
I'll stay out of the rest of the argument.
Re:"Zarefarid is reportedly no longer in Iran, tho (Score:5, Insightful)
Let the UN control? The same organization that put Cuba, Egypt, Russia, Saudi Arabia, China and Sudan on its human rights panel?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I take it you don't know what the human rights panel is there for, and why those countries were on it?
You do know why the UN is there for and why all countries are supposed to be a part of it? It's set up to be a soap box forum for countries to talk, not as a world government used to control things. I think that is what the parent was getting at. The UN is there so countries and get together, talk about Palestine and perhaps come up with a plan between themselves that originates in the UN, not as an organization to hand stuff over to.
Re: (Score:3)
You forgot to name the members of that organisation, which has put those countries there. Those are (in no particular order) France, Vietnam, Germany, India, U.S.A., South Africa ... etc. etc.
You know, it's called United Nations for a reason.
So, what was your complaint again?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, we do have an excellent track record [amnesty.org] when it comes to human rights.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, damn those Israelis for pissing on the UN and rejecting the Partition Plan and waging war on innoc... Wait, what? The Israelis agreed to the Partition Plan? It was actually the Arabs who rejected it and started the war?
Well, of course the Arabs rejected the Partition Plan! It was an unfair plan that deprives the Palestinian People of their rightfu
Re: (Score:2)
Well, of course the Arabs rejected the Partition Plan! It was an unfair plan that deprives the Palestinian People of their rightful lands and...
"Arabs have always reiterated that it was rejected because it was unfair: it gave the majority of the land (56 percent) to the Jews, who at that stage legally owned only 7 percent of it,[41] and remained a minority of the population."
From the very Wikipedia article you link to. Would you agree to a plan that gives 56% of your country's land to an ethnic minority that currently owns only 7%? Why?
Wait, what? The Partition Plan would have created a Palastinian State that's larger than the current Palastinian claims for statehood?
You are criticising Palestinians in 2012 for accepting that they already lost the majority of the land, and negot
Re: (Score:2)
When you say 56% land for 7% of the population it sure sounds bad. However, a huge
Re: (Score:2)
Hamas is primarily funded by...
TURKEY!
Hizbullah by Venezuela.
Not Saudi Arabia, google. Use it, I know ignorance is a great excuse but don't be an idiot. As for 'my team' I'm not american.
Re:"Zarefarid is reportedly no longer in Iran, tho (Score:4, Interesting)
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/12/us/us-accuses-iranians-of-plotting-to-kill-saudi-envoy.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all [nytimes.com]
iran plays the game too, although not too well(and they're amateurs - remember the regime doesn't have that long history and when they came to power they pretty much got rid of everyone working with international relations and operations who had any experience - making their plots like bad b-movies like trying to hire zetas or selling guns to some african rebel). mostly iran is pre-occupied with dealing with their domestic dissidents, throwing people to jail for porno and trying to make foreign export ends meet by any means their amateurs can think of and generally just being petty denialists. remember, as far as reports go and one outside the country can figure out most of the bomb attacks within iran have been actually carried out by iranian factions working toward overthrowing their petty government.
so, historically - what little there is of it - irans current regime has been quite aggressive both internationally and domestically, carrying out murders and attempts at them. what sets them apart from libya is that they're not so poor and they have more people and not just desert.
pissed off at a POS system? fuck, no, that's not the reason behind this hack, the reason is that it was hackable and they didn't fix it, they had time to fix it - but this guy did wise when he got out of the country because irans government has a history of outright killing guys like him.
Re:"Zarefarid is reportedly no longer in Iran, tho (Score:4)
... it is unclear when he left." Yeah...
I also interpreted that as "it's unclear where they left the corpse" until I remembered he had thousands of numbers/pins.
It's not so hard to move around when you've got a huge lot of money and know how to use the internet properly.
Re: (Score:3)
All he was trying to do was to protect the banks from somebody doing exactly what he did himself.
"though it is unclear when he left" (Score:5, Funny)
But not unclear *why* he left.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, he's going to be made out to be the villain in this case. And that same thing would happen in most countries.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, he's going to be made out to be the villain in this case. And that same thing would happen in most countries.
The way he went about making his point was wrong. There were probably other ways that wouldn't have caused him so much trouble.
Re: (Score:2)
Like...
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I agree with you on this, Evil is as Evil does regardless of where it does it.
Re: (Score:2)
If Anonymous/LulzSec, etc. does it against an American company, then they're heroes here on /. This guy does it against Iranian businesses and he's a villain.
I agree with you on this, Evil is as Evil does regardless of where it does it.
Slashdot posters are typically full of it, but I have never seen a situation where Anon/LulzSec get generally praised in /. for dumping millions of American bank user accounts info to the plain web for all to see. Citations plz?
can i haz the logix? (Score:2)
Nobody's making him out to be a hero, but tossing all the blame on him is a cop out. "Poor helpless banks were victimized by no good hacker"... that misses the entire point, which should be that security needs to be fixed.
I'm not sure how you logically derived that line above that you wrote from what the other AC posted (and which you were replying to):
Sorry, the banks are negligent and should be hauled over coals for this, but that makes him the fucking villain of it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
But not unclear *why* he left.
Yes, he "left".
I'm sure the Iranian government is outraged as his defection, and not secretly holding him in an north korean off-shore detainment centre.
Re:"though it is unclear when he left" (Score:4, Insightful)
Right, because all enemies of US are related.
Iran is a rich Muslim theocracy with some attibutes of a Republic. North Korea is a poverty-stricken pseudo-monarchy with attributes of Stalinism. They are about as likely to be on the speaking terms with each other as Henry Kissinger with Alexander Chikatilo.
Re:"though it is unclear when he left" (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:"though it is unclear when he left" (Score:4, Insightful)
It blows my mind at how little americans know about ... well ... everything they havn't heard on the telly.
And how much less we know about things we *have* heard on the telly...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I've read that North Korea and Iran have a long history of working together on long range missile and nuclear technology.
Re:"though it is unclear when he left" (Score:4, Interesting)
Reminder that there are still Americans who believe Iran and/or sadam-era Iraq are/where in bed with Al quaida.
I mean, forget that Sadam was a secular authoritarian who used the fight against islamism as the pretext for his purges (Baath are arabic socialist, and like most socialists dont have a lot of time for theocracy) and Iran are Shiia, whom Al Quaida consider to be heretical.
Of course the US administration suffer this same sort of blindness as well. The fact that Iraq will fall into the hands of Iran, almost innevitably should have been obvious to anyone who understood the implications of shifting the power balance from the Suni to the Shiia in Iraq.
Of course when your in the business of *creating* enemies, sometimes you do get to dictate terms. Once you piss off enough people, chances are they might put aside their differences and hang together in mutual defence.
Honestly if the US gets involved in many more wars I can honestly see a day when a lot of these powers put their heads together to create an Anti-NATO that should scare the hell out of anyone in the west.
Its best if we just backed the fuck out of there and let nature take its course. When was the last time someone wanted to invade Switzerland?
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Because one of the most important conditions for ANY person, corporation or Government to be doing business with any bank which has either primary or regional headquarters in Switzerland (read: most of them) is that they lay the fuck off of Switzerland? Plus the fact that it the Swiss have a higher number of firearms in private hands than in police or government hands - 3.4 million versus less than 360,000. Are you going to invade a country where half the population are trained in, and have immediate access
Re: (Score:2)
Wars arent fought with ground troops anymore. Whats a machine gun going to do to a Hellfile missile sent from a predator? Miss horribly while it and its wielder melt.
Re: (Score:1)
Let me guess, you've never served in the military in any branch. Seriously, do yourself a favor and read up on "combined arms" before you make any military related post.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on the objective. If the objective is to capture and control ground, then you need troops. If the objective is to simply obliterate an enemy, then you don't.
...The old war of obliteration isn't politically feasable any more though
so ... you do need troops? Or you don't? Or ... if you could blow everything up, you wouldn't, but you can't blow everything up, so you do, so it doesn't REALLY depend, since you can't really choose your objective.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You don't take over a country for their resources anymore. You take over their people and use them to accomplish your goals about the resources. That means you can't just kill everyone. But if everyone can defend themselves, then you will have to kill everyone. And to that means, it is pointless to try, as you will never take control of the people.
This is why a country without a government is so darn hard to take over. What good is governing a country without people or people who abide by the rules?
Re:"though it is unclear when he left" (Score:4, Informative)
Wars arent fought with ground troops anymore. Whats a machine gun going to do to a Hellfile missile sent from a predator?
They most certainly are. War for the next 50 years or so (unless things get really bad) will be primarily long term, low intensity conflict like what we've seen in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and Libya (admittedly we got lucky with Libya, as it was relatively short). Conflicts such as these tend to stretch on for years. See the Sri Lankan insurgency that lasted roughly 25 years. Insurgencies are usually fought with small arms; the largest weapons usually available to insurgents are large-caliber machine guns, mortars, and RPGs. Combine this with the fact that most insurgencies cannot afford a large stand-up fight, and you get a lot of hit and run contact. Thompson, the man who pretty much led the British during the counterinsurgency in Malaya back in the 50s (and who pretty much wrote the bible on COIN doctrine; he started it all) realized that you cannot do sweep and destroy methods to defeat an insurgency; you must use sweep and control. To defeat an insurgency, you have to control ground. To control ground, you need group troops. While armed drones are good for patrolling and attacks on vehicles or fixed positions (camps, emplacements, etc), this is very expensive, and in many cases overkill. Most states cannot afford technology such this, and tactically armed troops on the ground usually make much more sense anyway, as even in predator strikes troops still have to go in afterward to look for intelligence.
Re: (Score:2)
Take the two wars the US is currently involved in. The war on "terror" and supporting S Korea which is technically still at war with N Korea. Yes, both still involve boots-on-ground action, but everything you mentioned is in the past. Which is correct. But is the old ways of fighting wars. My statement of "anymore" means the bulk of the pushing
Re:"though it is unclear when he left" (Score:4, Interesting)
What sort of natural resources does Switzerland have?
All of these wars are about one thing: resources. Thats it. It has nothing to do with democracy, religion, west vs. whoever, etc. Those are all guises for the boob tube crowd. It is all about, as are all wars, resources.
Not making this realization is the fundamental flaw in all analyses of these issues. You run off on a tangent about how the stated goals make no sense and we need to this and that, its not working, blah blah blah. However, if you understand the true motivations, it works like a charm. Not only are we destabilizing the region, we are enriching powerful people/corporations by funneling American tax dollars through a war torn state, right back into the pockets of the wealthy. Its a great money laundering scheme for stealing from the people, and it creates a destabilized region where military might is the only "solution" to peace. Which in turn gives access to the resources and keeps them available for the nations with the most powerful military.
Re: (Score:2)
Right, because all enemies of US are related.
Iran is a rich Muslim theocracy with some attibutes of a Republic. North Korea is a poverty-stricken pseudo-monarchy with attributes of Stalinism. They are about as likely to be on the speaking terms with each other as Henry Kissinger with Alexander Chikatilo.
Ah, so about the same speaking terms as the president of cuba and the president of the usa?
Re:"though it is unclear when he left" (Score:5, Informative)
Not really true. Iran and North Korea are very much in the 'enemy of my enemy' stage of life, and they are both quite friendly with russia and to a lesser extent both with china.
They may not be ideologically aligned to each other, but given their mutual enemy and mutual ally, they're willing to talk to each other. Who do you think is still buying all this iranian oil that is being extracted now that the previous markets can't and won't buy it? China and North korea. Who does North Korea sell missiles and technology to? (The Taepodong series specifically, as well as some shorter range surface to surface missiles), Yemen, Syria, Iran and a few others. The north koreans need currency, the iranians have currency, the north koreans need oil, the iranians have oil, the iranians need missiles to strike Saudi, Iraq and Israel, the north koreans have missiles.
They are as far apart ideologically as Stalin and Hitler, and yet for years those two managed to get along oddly well, exchanging training and agreeing to carve up poland together. Iran and North Korea may not be all that ideologically compatible, but they have nothing to particularly drive a wedge between them (unlike stalin and hitler). They each have things the other wants, no directly overlapping or conflicting interests and a shared enemy in the united states, who, helpfully, binned them together in an 'axis of evil', and if they weren't playing nice before, that gave them a good kick in the ass to start playing nice with each other.
They very much are on strong speaking terms and technological exchange, through russia, through china and at sea. They are both under heavy sanctions meaning their selection of possible trade partners is rather limited, and that means they take what they can get. If you think they at least up until recently weren't on very good terms you should pull your head out of the sand. The new North Korea, under Kim Jong Un, and the current state of affairs in Iran, along with the situations in Burma and Pakistan throw into question any future agreements. A Burma out of chinas sphere of influence, and a pakistan not interested in technological exchanges significantly limit their access to resources and cash, and might significantly shake up their desired alliances.
That said, you're right, in that they have no real long term collaborative goals. At the first opportunity I'm sure both of them would love to do business with someone else. But until a better opportunity comes along you go with the friends your enemies have given you.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure the north korean government cares about a bunch of starving mostly illiterate peasants (who are illiterate, starving, and peasants because of government policy). If they wanted food China and Russia I'm sure could spare the small fraction of a percentage it would take to feed the couple of million starving people in the DPRK anyway. Between them China and Russia feed 1.5 billion people, the 23 million in North Korea, who are in large part still fed on their own isn't exactly a huge burden.
No,
Re:"though it is unclear when he left" (Score:5, Insightful)
And yet, both got the technology to produce weapons-grade uranium from the same Pakistani, A.Q. Khan. Don't assume that differing political systems and ideologies is an absolute block against cooperation. I think it's ridiculous that they'd have this guy in North Korea; Iran isn't exactly a country with a need to offshore their state security apparatus, nor do they have some fanatical devotion to not saying anything that is technically untrue.
Re: (Score:2)
Iran and North Korea have a history of working together on missile development and nuclear programs. They're in similar diplomatic positions with the rest of the world.
You seem to be arguing that the countries are fundamentally different, which really is an entirely different question. Surprise! Countries often can have a working relation despite their differences.
Re: (Score:2)
^^^
Replies to my comment that insist on "cooperation" between Iran and North Korea:
THIS IS WHAT AMERICAN PUBLIC REALLY BELIEVES
Re: (Score:2)
I am sure, American, Russian, Japanese, Chinese and South Korean scientists were looking at that launch, too.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure the Iranian government is outraged as his defection, and not secretly holding him in an north korean off-shore detainment centre.
There's a Q'urantanamo? ;)
Re: (Score:2)
With Iran's penchant for brutal legal sentences ending in death and/or dismemberment, I have to wonder: Is he still alive?
Perhaps he left in easy-to-assemble "kit" form?
Is this what one would call "career suicide"?
Re: (Score:2)
But not unclear *why* he left.
"Behram, make a hole in the desert".
Re: (Score:1)
How is Bradley Manning doing nowadays anyway, people still pushing for the death penalty for him and Assange?
Re: (Score:2)
most common PINs (Score:1)
I wonder what the most common PINs were.
Related: http://amitay.us/blog/files/most_common_iphone_passcodes.php [amitay.us]
Re: (Score:2)
People don't usually change PIN's so I would expect there are no "common" PIN's in the list. It's a number that comes with the card and you just use it.
Re: (Score:2)
At all the banks in the US I've used they make me set the PIN when I get the card.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting, this might be a new practice then? It's been about a year since I've opened an account. If it's not new maybe it's unique to the few banks I've used.
What a great guy (Score:2, Funny)
And we wonder why the general public has a sense of distrust and suspicion regarding "hackers".
Iran should be groveling before Allah that it's not the 40's and he wasn't trying to warn them about nukes.
Re:What a great guy (Score:5, Insightful)
Not quite as much distrust and suspicion as they have regarding "bankers".
Re: (Score:3)
Re:What a great guy (Score:4, Insightful)
And we wonder why the general public has a sense of distrust and suspicion regarding "hackers".
"When the affected banks, including the largest state institutions didn't respond" is the part that worries me, instead. The hacker in this case was just trying to help and pointed out a REALLY bad security flaw, but since the general public didn't know about it the institutions apparently decided to just ignore it. Publishing all the details was a bad move, that I definitely agree with, but atleast it got the institutions' attention, too bad that this will be spun in the media as the hacker's fault and not the institutions' fault, though.
hmm, you think it's a bad move. So what you are saying is, if the public doesn't know about it, it's good security? You do realize that if the dude who warned them found it, anyone could of found it. So while the public may not know about it, criminals might. So, in my view, the hacker did good, because the people in charge weren't listening, so it made them listen.
I don't know what world you live in, but in this world, there isn't only 1 smart person, there is many. When 1 person finds a flaw, you should figure that other people have found the flaw. And someone is going to exploit the flaw to steal something, because that is how the world rolls.
Re:What a great guy (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't know about the OP reasoning, but in my opinion, publishing full details including full card numbers and pin codes was a bad idea. Publish enough to demonstrate that you do in fact have the data, but not enough to make it trivial for someone to use the data. Partial card number, enough that the cardholder can be reasonably certain that's his card and the last 2-3 digits of the pin. It's one thing to go public and embarrass the banks, it's another to expose 3M customers to fraud and abuse by making it easy for the crooks.
Re: (Score:1)
I know it's standard practice on /. not to RTFA, but it even says in the first sentence of the summary that this guy demonstrated the legitimacy of his findings with 1,000 captured accounts.
Yes, he exposed sensitive data. Data that was already exposed by this vulnerability. Now at least everyone knows that their data isn't safe, as opposed to before when there was an illusion of security.
Re: (Score:3)
yes the vulnerability already existed, but he merely took advantage of it like a criminal that security is intended to combat.
Now at least everyone knows that their data isn't safe, as opposed to before when there was an illusion of security
would you similarly argue that terrorist
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I know it's standard practice on slashdot to misunderstand what is written, so, from RTFA:
...providing affected institutions the details, including 1,000 captured bank accounts.
Proving it to the institutions, and embarrassing them by disclosing it publicly are not the same thing. His public disclosure included too much information.
Re: (Score:2)
Comprehension fail!
I never said he shouldn't have disclosed publicly, I said he exposed too much information. There was no need to expose full account information, card number, and pin. He only needed to disclose enough to demonstrate that he did in fact possess the information, therefore, the vulnerability was real, and that the banks were ignoring it.
Full disclosure doesn't mean disclosing everyone's information thus making it easier for the crooks. You can do full disclosure in a more responsible fashion
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
So, in my view, the hacker did good, because the people in charge weren't listening, so it made them listen.
I think you missed the point. He didn't "make them listen". The banks haven't fixed the security problem. All they have done is asked their customers to change their PIN as well as blocking some ATMs.
So, no, this isn't a good move, because all it has done is caused three million card users to be further annoyed as their cards are still no safer than before - in fact less so, because there is a proof of concept out there now with guaranteed ROI - they can't get to their own cash as easily as they have to go
Re: (Score:1)
So, in my view, the hacker did good, because the people in charge weren't listening, so it made them listen.
I think you missed the point. He didn't "make them listen". The banks haven't fixed the security problem. All they have done is asked their customers to change their PIN as well as blocking some ATMs.
How do you know this? Are you in Iran and working for the banks? Even the article notes that they might have silently fixed, or are in the process of fixing them. Most of the ATM's have stopped giving out money. I think that clearly shows they are working on it. Or do you think they will just close it all down and never start working again?
Re: (Score:2)
What he should have done is gone to the credit agencies like Visa and Mastercard who would likely cut off the banks accounts in very quick order, thereby forcing the banks to fix the security hole. Even though a debit visa isn't touching the bank's money, the big credit companies take these things rather seriously if it has their name on it.
These aren't Visa or Mastercard issued cards, but Iran's own. The stupidity in your post, oh my god.
Re: (Score:2)
Security through obscurity? Seriously bad idea when it comes to dealing with other peoples' money. You just don't know who is the wrong person to piss off, until their card details (and their PIN!?) are published...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Publishing all the details was a bad move, that I definitely agree with, but atleast it got the institutions' attention, too bad that this will be spun in the media as a plot by Israel and the West to destabilize Iran's economy and not the institutions' fault, though.
FTFY, at least if you get your news from Fars.
Let a lesson be (Score:4, Informative)
Karma whoring, dude's blog linked here [blogspot.com] (yay for in browser translation)
Re: (Score:2)
The message probably never had a chance to get to someone who could do something about it. Not everyone moves at Internut speed...
What a hack job of reporting! (Score:5, Informative)
Points of fact:
1) He didn't hack any banks. He was working in a payment processing company that had monopoly in Iran.
2) The card numbers and pin numbers were kept in clear text in their internal systems
3) He did complain about it repeatedly to his bosses, who blew him off
4) He posted the pin numbers and account numbers to a blog. Pin numbers have some digits before and after; They are not quite usable in person. In order to use them online a second pin is required which was not posted.
5) the Payment processing center's license has been revoked, and all people are in panic trying to change their pin numbers. The only action all ATMs allow is pin change.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. If your boss won't listen escalate until someone will. Also try to explain things in terms they will understand, like case history.
Re:What a hack job of reporting! (Score:4, Funny)
True, he should have posted his boss's pin number only.
Financial security through obscurity? (Score:2, Funny)
Just when I thought Iran was the safest place to stash my money now THIS happens? Where should I go next? Somalia?
Re: (Score:2)
Just when I thought Iran was the safest place to stash my money now THIS happens? Where should I go next? Somalia?
I put all mine in the Bank of Atlantis.
At least I don't have to worry about someone else getting it.
Re: (Score:3)
Just when I thought Iran was the safest place to stash my money now THIS happens? Where should I go next? Somalia?
I put all mine in the Bank of Atlantis. At least I don't have to worry about someone else getting it.
I used to do that too, and then one day they told me they'd lost it all. Some nonsense about "water damage".
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Just when I thought Iran was the safest place to stash my money now THIS happens? Where should I go next? Somalia?
No!!!No, No, No!
Nigeria is the country where your money is safest. Here's what you do: Send the money to me personally and I will place it with all the other money I have for distribution on behalf of "Lotto"winners", "Deceased Estate Distribution A/C's" etc, you money is safe with me as I am a very honourable person, do this quickly before someone tries to cheat you out of all your money!
Honour
Re: (Score:1)
Just when I thought Iran was the safest place to stash my money now THIS happens? Where should I go next? Somalia?
Nigeria seems to be able handle a lot of cash...
Proof that the term ... (Score:2)
Much good it'll do you. (Score:1)
Hacker? (Score:1)
He didn't hack into the system. He just stole some information from the company he was working at, Eniac (eniac-psp.net) and put it on the Internet, because he couldn't make money out of it. He blackmailed the bankers to get 1$ for every of the 3 million accounts, and they refused to pay the money.
Now, he's claiming to be a hacker!
Pay peanuts get monkeys (Score:1)
The nerd told them they had a security problem and they did nothing.
Conclusion. So their software people were incompetent.
Inference. The theocracy are not buying the best. Probably only hiring "theologically safe" programmers.
I'm gonna go with... (Score:2)
BEFORE he "dropped these details — including card numbers and PINs — on his blog".
Re: (Score:1)
crap. I just can't get a break.......
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)