
A Cybersecurity Firm’s Sharp Rise and Stunning Collapse - jontaydev
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/11/04/a-cybersecurity-firms-sharp-rise-and-stunning-collapse
======
gwern
> “Institutions will try to preserve the problem to which they are the
> solution.” — Clay Shirky

[https://kk.org/thetechnium/the-shirky-prin/](https://kk.org/thetechnium/the-
shirky-prin/)

------
marcoperaza
Here is a proper news article for those who can do without a dozen pages of
drivel about the CEO's hairdo, flying lessons, and underwear shopping:
[https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/18/fbi_raids_cybersecu...](https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/18/fbi_raids_cybersecurity_firm_tiversa/)

~~~
notzuck
Whilst theregister.co.uk does get straight to the point. the newyorker article
tells a very interesting story about his work in hacking P2P, working with the
secret service, trying to sell his software to the FBI, GPS tracking his mates
cheating wife etc.

~~~
Ozumandias
Yeah, people on here don't seem to understand that you read the New Yorker for
narrative and literary craft, not for getting information as fast as possible.

~~~
SilasX
And New Yorker article submitters don't understand that the HN crowd tends to
prefer the Register style, at least for providing a focal point where everyone
can get up to speed quickly for a productive discussion.

~~~
ThrowawayR2
> _And New Yorker article submitters don 't understand that the HN crowd tends
> to prefer the Register style_

Speak for yourself, buddy.

~~~
SilasX
I'm speaking for the quality of discussion that happens when everyone is aware
of the all the facts presented in the article, vs when everyone is mired in
unproductive guesswork because they missed the critical details of the threat
vector because it's wedged between a description of some boss's pursed lips
and the coffee used that in that office.

Edit: And "buddy"? Really?

~~~
robocat
Alternatively, The Register article contains so little information you can't
discuss much and hners create their own "facts".

~~~
SilasX
Only if the debate hinges on the idiosyncratic mannerisms of the subjects of
the story. I saw plenty of substantive facts in the Register article, with
less filler.

~~~
notzuck
Just accept that not everyone wants the same as you.

I like brevity but the first article painted a much better picture. The second
one barely a dip into the most pertinent facts. This company is unknown to
most and without the backstory my care level was at 0.

~~~
SilasX
And yet you can’t give examples of the relevant facts that are in the NYer but
not the Resgister (style of CEO’s jacket doesn’t count).

I know people have different preferences. But _beliefs_ —about which articles
lead to productive discussions — can be confused. No one is spending the hour
to read this before commenting. Expecting that is a bad idea.

~~~
notzuck
I didn't care about this based on the register's reporting because they are
nobodies. I cared about it based on the newyorkers because they told me the
whole story.

Different things are useful at different times. Today that useful thing
happened to be the long form journalism rather than than the twitter form
journalism.

------
baobabKoodaa
The author seems to confuse peer-to-peer file sharing networks and onion
routing. The explanations in the article don't make any sense.

~~~
gwern
I was also a little puzzled by

> In the nineties, Microsoft pursued a canonical FUD strategy, creating phony
> error messages to make consumers wary of using Windows on a competitor’s
> operating system—a tactic that resulted in a legal settlement exceeding two
> hundred million dollars.

~~~
acdha
I believe that’s a reference to this code and the resulting court case:

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code)

~~~
gwern
Huh. I was thinking it was something to do with MS Word or other MS apps
(which I know often had cross-OS or alternate OS versions, like Mac support).
But no, that is indeed about... running Windows on a non-MS OS (non-MS DOS).
Back when Windows was a GUI shell around DOS. Now _that_ is history.

------
GhettoMaestro
What the hell did I just read? Wow.

------
cerved
Ahaha, the fake memoir

------
lanevsky
Cybersecurity is not security? Like Anonymous cryptocurrencies are pseudo-
anonymous? [https://inechain.com/blog/what-are-anonymous-
cryptocurrencie...](https://inechain.com/blog/what-are-anonymous-
cryptocurrencies-and-how-do-they-work/)

------
SlowRobotAhead
I thought it was going to be Crowdstrike. But I suppose that hasn’t happened
yet.

Whatever tech, whatever assets, whatever they have, you can do as you will, I
would need to have my head in the sand to be doing business with them. Too
much smoke not to be at least a little fire. Just my opinion of course!

Edit: One of those times practicality clashes with politics apparently. Can’t
say anything bad about the company that failed to protect high profile
clients, then used that failure to help start the Trump/Russia fiasco before
quietly walking their statements back - because to be aware of that would mean
supporting the bad man.

~~~
chelmzy
Just purchased their product as it is at the top of the EDR market. Could you
explain your comment?

