> Elements of Boeing's parts and distribution business recently experienced a cybersecurity incident
Sounds like boring data for the curious mind, unless logistics is your vice.
That said, I'm learning a lot about digital forensics
Some victim has been violated by a criminal, with the breaking in and stealing and threats, but doesn't further violation happen when others pile onto that?
Also, isn't the threat of releasing the information that the victim will be further violated by others if the information is released, and so those others could arguably be seen as enforcers for the criminal threat?
My ideas of what's the right thing, and how determined I am about it, change over time.
One reason for change is receiving new information, or realizing a different way of looking at a situation.
A group called ALPHV (who AFAICT was responsible for the MGM resort outage) even makes an API available and indexes their leaks so users can search through them and download individual files. One particular leak for the 3-D Engineering Corporation caught my eye - I can see a bunch of Solidworks parts and assemblies from just a quick glance of the file list. I'm betting there's some ITAR violating files in there which makes me feel icky. Any serious leak from Boeing could contain stuff that's actually relevant to natsec.
That said, we are talking about Boeing here, which was recently responsible for negligently killing hundreds of people. I'm inclined to say "fuck their right to confidentiality."
Lose their right to confidentiality wrt public interest independent investigation of the 737 MAX 8 and/or other possible wrongdoing/dysfunction?
Or lose their right to confidentiality just in general, as a kind of mob justice lite?
In both cases, how clearly can we distinguish logical reasonings in pursuit of justice, and convenient rationalization for something we wanted to do anyway?