breakingcups@lemmy.world
on 27 Jun 2024 05:41
nextcollapse
What a weird set of events. It’s not even clear what was actually used as infection method.
Wahots@pawb.social
on 27 Jun 2024 06:00
nextcollapse
Wow, if I was a customer, I’d be dropping them immediately even if I didn’t pirate. That is sketchy as hell.
Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc
on 27 Jun 2024 06:39
collapse
It wasn’t even the pirate that’s get attacked, it’s an indirect attack on Webhard, a cloud storage system provider that utilise BitTorrent. The ISP attack Webhard users by injecting malware to both disable Webhard software and mess up the user’s file, some even had their PC disabled probably due to messed up C drive. Some individuals is being charged but to think ISP will use such tactic just because their paying customer used up the bandwidth they provided, the only sensible choice is like you said, drop the damn thing if possible.
RestrictedAccount@lemmy.world
on 27 Jun 2024 11:17
collapse
Why would a telecom company care what the content of the bits they are being paid to transmit?
threaded - newest
What a weird set of events. It’s not even clear what was actually used as infection method.
Wow, if I was a customer, I’d be dropping them immediately even if I didn’t pirate. That is sketchy as hell.
It wasn’t even the pirate that’s get attacked, it’s an indirect attack on Webhard, a cloud storage system provider that utilise BitTorrent. The ISP attack Webhard users by injecting malware to both disable Webhard software and mess up the user’s file, some even had their PC disabled probably due to messed up C drive. Some individuals is being charged but to think ISP will use such tactic just because their paying customer used up the bandwidth they provided, the only sensible choice is like you said, drop the damn thing if possible.
Why would a telecom company care what the content of the bits they are being paid to transmit?
The volume I can understand.