Let me be perfectly clear, lots of the blame lies with that attacker. But it is also the responsibility of the a web host to fortify their systems sufficiently, which clearly wasn't done in this case.
If I give the bank my money and the next day I get an email saying "Sorry, we didn't feel like locking up last night and some kids looted the vault." I'd have a hard time calling the bank the victim.
And something concrete: PHPFog knew the holes existed and were negligent. I would say they even have some contributory negligence (IANAL). Especially after admitting they knew they were vulnerable.
And we certainly don't call the bank the victim.
Bank robber, 13, could get 21 years in US jail (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.cb17379375828ffc...)
Teen bank robber to be held for two years (http://www.morningjournal.com/articles/2011/02/18/news/doc4d...)
Boy, 15, Charged in Armed Bank Robbery in Lancaster (http://articles.latimes.com/2002/aug/09/local/me-bankrob9)
2. Why do you think banks aren't considered victims in cases of robbery? Because they could have done more to prevent the robbery from happening?