How is it wrong? If someone was promoting their product in conjunction to some loss of life, or tragedy, that would be wrong.
A service is proven unsecure, so a founder provides his companies alternative product.
A service is proven unsecure, so a founder provides his companies alternative product.
Even huge companies like Google get hacked. So saying that you can do better just because someone got hacked is just ridiculous. It's about how the hack was handled and what information was disclosed that matters IMO. From what BrowserStack says, it seems like only a few emails addresses were disclosed. I'm not saying that this is bad. But this could have happened to any other company. Everything in the fake email is probably bull---- (has anyone tried to find out if anything in it was true?).