This isn’t owning fast food chains; rather compromising some AI startup that has some of them as a customer.
Title is misleading.
Title is misleading.
Personally I feel the title is justified but I understand and respect your viewpoint.
Also keep in mind that trying to clarify the such would also make the title much longer than I desired.
That’s what you should call it. It explains to readers what’s going on without over sensationalism.
That isn’t too long either.
By this argument, getting access by phishing a company employee also wouldn't count as an attack on the company.
These companies are responsible for their employees behavior and data but they are not responsible for nor legally liable for (in most cases, some exceptions apply) the actions of a third party that they have retained to help with hiring.
In fact the contract they have with said third party likely absolves them of any liability.
The title should be: I owned an AI startup via Firebase misconfiguration.
You can even name the startup if you want. That’s not flashy though and this person wants marketing.
The right people will read it (Chattr.ai’s customers) and respond . Right now everyone looks at it and some CISO will overreact and make everyone go check their Firebase configurations which may likely be a non-value add.
Naming and shaming does work.