Hacker News Reader

Comment by quotemstr | Hacker News Reader

Retroactively, right?

I worked at Quora, but left before this change was made, but I believe it was totally retroactive, mainly because I got emails with information about my previous anonymous answers and a deadline to get the one-time link.

Now... if the emails were logged and in the exploited database, then all bets are off, but there's no indication that happened at all.

There are about a hundred other things about this that give me anxiety, but Quora is run by extremely competent people (engineering and otherwise), so I am pretty confident about their ability to be transparent and to know the extent of any issue.

This entire thing is really shitty for everyone involved, but given Quora's tenure (almost nine years!) that this is the first breach is pretty amazing, and that they've done so much work to make it less of a problem is great.

None of the above is meant to diminish the general dissatisfaction others are expressing here.

>given Quora's tenure (almost nine years!) that this is the first breach is pretty amazing

I am sorry but this is #ShitHackerNewsSays worthy. Let me fix it for you

>given Equifax's tenure (almost 119 years! Since 1899) that this is the first breach is pretty amazing

Better now? Downvote me if you want, but there are no pats in the back for having PII leaks, no matter the years.

There have been at least 5 different breaches (of varying impact) at Equifax in the recent past several years. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equifax)

Another set of 5 data breaches at Equifax dating back to 2013 (some but not all of these overlap with the Wikipedia reference) (https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2017/09/08/equif...)

I would not be surprised if Equifax has been "breached" more than a hundred times over its history. Do your research.

I don't know why you need to be so aggressive. You've made multiple comments on this thread, all in this vein.

Flagged.

He is not aggressive at all. Upset? Maybe. Aggressive? No.

As a meta point, the word "aggressive" has undergone significant scope creep in tech lately. It's worrisome that lots of people with influence have started to punish messages that, while polite, express explicit, forceful, and direct disagreement. The only remaining option is an indirect approach laden with false pleasantries and ambiguous language that leaves the reader confused about the actual state of agreement. We need to push back against false claims of aggressiveness.

Really? If I dismissed your comment with #ShitHackerNewsSays, you'd say that was a "forceful, direct disagreement"? Maybe you think this is great because "false" pleasantries are cut off, but for me that's aggressive.

This is an understandable counter point. I don’t really agree but I appreciate it.

This is the one which came to light.

Which is all that is worth speculating about and discussing in this thread, or are you suggesting otherwise?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com