PSN Down, How Do You Feel?

[Arlen]

That "automatic receipt of offenders' IP addresses" is a bit much, in my opinion. :/ And it's Sony's system anyway, they should be able to dictate what features that they want to implement, not what some immature hackers wish for.





Though I'm intrigued by the concept of HomeBrew applications, the hackers aren't entitled to hack anything. Sony perfectly has the right to restrict and permit whatever features they wish on their product, regardless of what the hacker community has to say about it. And the hackers have no right to retaliate in such a way that compromises the security of innocent individuals, no matter how butthurt they may be against Sony's anti-hacking stance.



I agree; it's nice that PlayStation players are being offered concessions in the wake of such a tragic time for the company of Sony.





Uh...this. >_>



Interesting...I wonder whether the lawsuit(s) will actually be upheld if that clause is indeed in the PlayStation Network contract...
Stupid exploitations...



0_0 Apparently, it was Sony Online Entertainment this time (I thought they were the same thing... >_>). Honestly, I'd like to thoroughly smack whichever butthurt individual(s) is/are doing this heinous act against Sony.



I think this will be a major setback for Sony if their efforts to combat the lawsuit are not fruitful. This occurrence seems to be one of the most notable threats to videogaming in recent memory, and the number of potentially affected accounts is nothing to shy away at - it's in the millions right now. I'm not exactly sure about the methods Sony used to properly encrypt financial data of their customers, but I'm confident that they will be constantly re-evaluating their data safeguards more often in the near future. I'm just hoping that the incident doesn't cause Sony to skim on their hardware/software offerings for the next console generation... Furthermore, the larger amount of people that are afflicted by theft and credit damaging, the more likely that said users may switch to another gaming company and abandon Sony altogether, IMO.



The reparations should be given to all countries affected, not just PlayStation players with U.S. citizenship. :\ As Team Fail stated, the fate of Sony is going to be highly dependent on their consumers, especially if any of the said consumers receive downfall from this incident and must weather the processes of resolving online monetary theft and such.

Also, this link was posted earlier: apparently sensitive data was not stored in cleartext form, nor was there a deal posed to Sony that required them to pay a certain sum to purchase the "list" back from the hackers.... https://www.qj.net/ps3/news/sony-sheds-more-light-on-psn-credit-card-info-security.html

The thing is they are suing people because they altered a product THEY own. This didn't change anything online or to others, this was for personal benefit - and I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

I mean, what if Nintendo sued you for using action replay or putting a sticker on your DS?

 

[The Corrupt Plague]

This makes me glad I don't own a PS3. Hearing about the rootkit CD's from 2005 was more than enough to make me want to stay away from Sony and sure enough, something else happened and all it took was this incident to turn them into a laughingstock among gamers. How do I feel? The people that were caught in this storm of stolen data, I can understand their pain and I hope things get much better for them and as for Sony, this is yet another reason for me to keep my distance.

 

[Captain Fabio]

Well, doesn't look like good news just yet, guys.
https://www.joystiq.com/2011/05/06/psn-reactivation-delayed-for-further-testing-not-coming-back/

​

​

 

[Luck]

https://bitmob.com/articles/detective-work-reveals-psn-servers-up-to-date
PSN servers weren't outdated, like claimed by the hackers.

Sony removed OtherOS, an advertised feature.

I'm just wondering, how was it advertised? I don't remember seeing a commercial where Sony gloats about their OtherOS, so I'm going to assume you're just spouting nonsense.

Geohot decided to re-enable something he had paid money for. I will bring up my ethics point again. The law may give Sony the right to take your stuff back without returning your money, but I will instantly support everybody who goes vigilante to claim it back.

It's called fail0verflow. He only introduced Linux to the PS3 again. Geohot unlocked every PS3 key except for 1. And you have every right to deny the update, Sony never forced it onto you and it's not like your PS3 would brick if you didn't update it.

Geohot did not break PS3 keys to conduct piracy, and suing him for letting other people use his work for piracy is the same as banning knifes from the market because they can be used as murderous weapons.

Dude. I just said that Geohot got sued because he distributed PS3 information, like, in the next sentence. You even responded to it so I know you listened.

Reminds me of Scientology. If people expose you, fair game instantly applies, right?

Um no, lol.

 

[Masqueraine]

psn down, how do you feel?

Indifferent, leaning towards annoyed. More towards the hacker than anybody. If it's anonymous they need to get over the fact that a company is protecting its property, and if it's somebody else, well, the plot thickens..

 

[ShinyMeowth]

I'm just wondering, how was it advertised? I don't remember seeing a commercial where Sony gloats about their OtherOS, so I'm going to assume you're just spouting nonsense.

I do not know about TV, but I have seen it in PS3 advertisements, not reviews on magazines. While there is the possibility that a third party put money towards advertising the console, I am positive that it was in fact Sony.

It's called fail0verflow. He only introduced Linux to the PS3 again. Geohot unlocked every PS3 key except for 1. And you have every right to deny the update, Sony never forced it onto you and it's not like your PS3 would brick if you didn't update it.

Let's make something clear. Did they inform you that OtherOS would be removed in the update, and is it reversible?

Dude. I just said that Geohot got sued because he distributed PS3 information, like, in the next sentence. You even responded to it so I know you listened.

You said it yourself. He got sued because he distributed information. Information that could be used to restore your Console's sabotaged features. Can you explain exactly what is wrong with that?

Um no, lol.

But that is exactly what you were implying. You were implying that corporations have the right to disrupt the free flow of information. This reminds me of all the crap they have put Assange through.

 

[Ces soirees-la]

To be quite frank, you seem to be defending people who acted like children when something didn't got their way.
Way to be adult about it.
In their revenge, they've compromised secure information of innocents, while inconveniencing people who use the PSN to earn money, the average player and have put Sony into a serious amount of dog doodoo.
People need to start acting their age.

 

[Luck]

I do not know about TV, but I have seen it in PS3 advertisements, not reviews on magazines. While there is the possibility that a third party put money towards advertising the console, I am positive that it was in fact Sony.

Link?

Let's make something clear. Did they inform you that OtherOS would be removed in the update, and is it reversible?

That's not how security updates work. I'm guessing Microsoft is full of bastards because they allowed an update that banned Black Ops pirates, huh?

When you're playing your PS3 offline, you can do whatever you want with it. However, once you go online, Sony can do what they want with your PS3, with obvious exceptions.

You said it yourself. He got sued because he distributed information. Information that could be used to restore your Console's sabotaged features.

I'll say it once more; Geohotz unlocked every PS3 key except for one. There is a huge difference between unlocking multiple keys and restoring OtherOS.

Can you explain exactly what is wrong with that?

Yeah, it wasn't his right to distribute that information.

 

[Captain Fabio]

Well, they have given us a date, apparently:
https://m.ie.ign.com/articles/1166810?sms_ss=facebook&at_xt=4dc855277b5d2dc7,0

PSN will be back up around the 31st May.​

​

 

[Luck]

Well, they have given us a date, apparently:
https://m.ie.ign.com/articles/1166810?sms_ss=facebook&at_xt=4dc855277b5d2dc7,0

PSN will be back up around the 31st May.​

​

Six weeks sounds like plenty of time to completely fix their servers. I wish PSN and multiplayer functionality for games would come instead of…Qriocity. I don't know anyone that uses Qriocity.

 

[ShinyMeowth]

Link?

Somehow I knew this was coming. I don't really know where I can find a documentation of all advertisements posted in '08s magazines, so unless I magically stumble across it I am not going to bother. Let's compromise and say for now that it was not advertised.

That's not how security updates work. I'm guessing Microsoft is full of bastards because they allowed an update that banned Black Ops pirates, huh?

Did Microsoft also remove a key feature of the Xbox when doing that? No? Then I have no problem with them.

When you're playing your PS3 offline, you can do whatever you want with it. However, once you go online, Sony can do what they want with your PS3, with obvious exceptions.

Really? Does that also mean Acer could arbitrarily format the hard drive of my sister's netbook at will whenever she went online? Explain to me how some company can have rights on a machine you have purchased.

I'll say it once more; Geohotz unlocked every PS3 key except for one. There is a huge difference between unlocking multiple keys and restoring OtherOS.

Wouldn't have happened if Sony hadn't removed OtherOS in the first place...

Yeah, it wasn't his right to distribute that information.

How exactly is it not his right to publish his research?

 

[donavannj]

How exactly is it not his right to publish his research?

When it comes to proprietary security keys like the ones used in the PS3, he cannot publish them without the express written consent of Sony.

 

[Oryx]

Wouldn't have happened if Sony hadn't removed OtherOS in the first place...

This I can't agree with. I'm not so sure about the rest, but this is pretty much saying that if they do something wrong, someone else should do something completely unrelated wrong to them. For example, someone steals from you. You have the option of taking what you own back and nothing more, not taking what you own back because it would be vigilante and going through legal means, or taking what you own back and a good chunk of everything else the thief owns. While stealing your own item back would be arguably alright depending on your morality, there's no morality (except for a lack of morality I guess?) where stealing your stuff back and then stealing all of his stuff isn't as bad as what they did to you.

 

[Luck]

Did Microsoft also remove a key feature of the Xbox when doing that? No? Then I have no problem with them.

>Key feature
Ignoring that though, that wasn't really my point. Microsoft doesn't inform users of every change on their firmware update, but you don't seem to mind.

Really? Does that also mean Acer could arbitrarily format the hard drive of my sister's netbook at will whenever she went online? Explain to me how some company can have rights on a machine you have purchased.

There are limits of course. By the way, Sony did get sued for removing OtherOS. It wasn't their right to remove it, but then again it wasn't the right of the hackers to pirate games with it either.

Wouldn't have happened if Sony hadn't removed OtherOS in the first place...

Strangely enough, Sony only removed OtherOS because hackers used it to pirate games.

How exactly is it not his right to publish his research?

It's for security reasons.

 

[Razer302]

After all the changed dates and everything I ended up getting a 360 from my job for free. My second 360 which I hope doesn't let me down like the first one breaking within the first 6 months... But I will always remain loyal to sony, Because at the end of the day if these hackers hadn't messed with their console in the first place none of this would be happening.

Information about otherOS can be found: here and honestly I don't care that sony removed this. I don't see the point in having a console as a computer when I bought my first PS3 I didn't even know this was a feature I bought it for the games and how it runs and I still calls it as being better than the 360, the online community is a lot nicer than that of the 360, the most fun I have on 360 is annoying other players that think there awesome.

 

[ShinyMeowth]

When it comes to proprietary security keys like the ones used in the PS3, he cannot publish them without the express written consent of Sony.

I am not an expert on the subject, but I believe that was necessary in order to restore OtherOS. It was something that was taken from him, and I support every measure taken to restore it. Side effects are the initial offender's (Sony's) fault.

This I can't agree with. I'm not so sure about the rest, but this is pretty much saying that if they do something wrong, someone else should do something completely unrelated wrong to them. For example, someone steals from you. You have the option of taking what you own back and nothing more, not taking what you own back because it would be vigilante and going through legal means, or taking what you own back and a good chunk of everything else the thief owns. While stealing your own item back would be arguably alright depending on your morality, there's no morality (except for a lack of morality I guess?) where stealing your stuff back and then stealing all of his stuff isn't as bad as what they did to you.

See my reply on the quote above. He did what he did to restore OtherOS. Side-effects screwed up Sony. If Sony hadn't removed functionality from his system in the first place, this would not have happened. I cannot sympathize with them.

>Key feature
Ignoring that though, that wasn't really my point. Microsoft doesn't inform users of every change on their firmware update, but you don't seem to mind.

As long as the updates do not block me from legally doing things I could do before, I have no problem with them.

There are limits of course. By the way, Sony did get sued for removing OtherOS. It wasn't their right to remove it, but then again it wasn't the right of the hackers to pirate games with it either.

Once again, I have no knowledge of Geohot using OtherOS to pirate games. You can use Windows as a platform for pirating programs, does that mean Microsoft has the right to disable Windows?

Strangely enough, Sony only removed OtherOS because hackers used it to pirate games.

Again, that is flawed logic. You can't go banning knifes just because they can be used as murderous weapons.

It's for security reasons.

He restored functionality taken from him, and published information so others could also restore that functionality. Side effects caused by that are Sony's problem, as Sony was the one who caused this.

Anyway, I am no expert on the subject, so could somebody explain if the attacks to the PSN were related to Geohot's research?

 

[Captain Fabio]

Again, that is flawed logic. You can't go banning knifes just because they can be used as murderous weapons.

Uhhh... Yes you can.
But, IMO, that isn't 'flawed' logic since a company can do what they like to prevent pirating games. If they feel that something is been taken advantage of, then they can do as they wish.

It is their company, they created it and they can do what they like with it.​

​

 

[donavannj]

I am not an expert on the subject, but I believe that was necessary in order to restore OtherOS. It was something that was taken from him, and I support every measure taken to restore it. Side effects are the initial offender's (Sony's) fault.

What he didn't have to do was publish his find before getting written permission from Sony, which is the actual illegal part, since they're proprietary security keys. I don't see how publishing the keys was legal in any way since he didn't have permission to spread them.

 

[ShinyMeowth]

Uhhh... Yes you can.
But, IMO, that isn't 'flawed' logic since a company can do what they like to prevent pirating games. If they feel that something is been taken advantage of, then they can do as they wish.

It is their company, they created it and they can do what they like with it.​

I know why they did it, but it is still unacceptable. Geohot purchased the console for the OtherOS feature, and it was incredibly logical and fair for him to fix it, and to let other people who purchased the console for the OtherOS feature know how to fix it themselves. It may be illegal, but the law can be bent and abused at will by those with power, and in such instances the only solution is to break it.

What he didn't have to do was publish his find before getting written permission from Sony, which is the actual illegal part, since they're proprietary security keys. I don't see how publishing the keys was legal in any way since he didn't have permission to spread them.

For some reason I have a feeling Sony would not give him permission to publish information on how to undo their bidding. Geohot did the right thing, and I applaud him for it.

 

[donavannj]

For some reason I have a feeling Sony would not give him permission to publish information on how to undo their bidding. Geohot did the right thing, and I applaud him for it.

Of course not. Those are security keys that could compromise their customers' security if released.