LulzSec: 50 Days of Lulz statement

Re:LulzSec: 50 Days of Lulz statement by kristofferR on Saturday June 25, 2011 @10:21PM (#2697210)

Damn, the AT&T-release is especially juicy. It contains a lot of highly confidential information about technology and strategy that their competitors would love to get their hands on.

I'm a quite technical guy and I barely understand a thing. No wonders AT&T are having troubles with fixing their network troubles, it looks like a massive, massive beast of technology.

I found the frequency chart fascinating. It's available publicly here: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:LulzSec: 50 Days of Lulz statement by ender7 on Saturday June 25, 2011 @11:36PM (#2697308)

Given the juiciness of this, I'm surprised that more companies don't have corp espionage groups to carry out little lulsec attacks.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:LulzSec: 50 Days of Lulz statement by afterburner on Sunday June 26, 2011 @12:57AM (#2697414)

Because if they ever got caught the company would be sued out of existence (probably bought by competitors at that point). They have too much to lose in most cases.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:LulzSec: 50 Days of Lulz statement by count on Monday June 27, 2011 @08:47AM (#2701100)

Based on the HBGary leak, I'd say that they currently do.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:LulzSec: 50 Days of Lulz statement by Skywing on Sunday June 26, 2011 @12:04AM (#2697340)

My first job out of college was at Nortel, coding their 4G data network infrastructure. I still think I only understood about 20% of the big picture by the time I left. So many moving parts, massive code base and tons of acronyms.

[ Parent | on HN ]

[deleted]

Re:LulzSec: 50 Days of Lulz statement by mkr-hn on Saturday June 25, 2011 @10:48PM (#2697248)

How would using a Mac prevent that?

[ Parent | on HN ]