So, let's recap the sequence of events:
Who will blame be shifted to next?
Look -- if people haven't realized by now that the Internet pretty much lacks a delete function, then (IMNSHO) it becomes the requirement of each and every one of us to pay close attention to what we're reading, to use our own big brains and fine-tuned bullshit detectors to suss out whether something makes sense.
Since this is my blog, I'm going to parcel out blame the way I see it:
What's this got to do with security? I don't know, maybe nothing directly related. But it certainly raises the question -- what if someone intentionally wanted to cause nearly permanent damage to a person or a corporation? Malicious content, disguised as "news," certainly seems to have become a potentially successful attack vector this week.
Worried about a social engineering attack on a massive scale? I suspect that what happened Monday (8 September) was the largest social engineering attack in history -- although I wouldn't classify it as intentionally malicious. Just you wait until the idea spreads.
I read this story too, but you missed out a critical step which involved human error... Somebody at Bloomberg who scans the news headlines on various sites, saw the story on Google News and then posted it onto the Bloomberg wire which gets fed straight into the terminals of the Wall St traders. So when the traders saw the story, it was supposedly from a trusted source, and also removed from all previous context - so that's why they started bailing. So I'd say the 65% blame you gave investors would be split 50% to the clerk at Bloomberg that posted the story, and 15% to the traders. A quick phone call from any of the humans involved would have sorted it out pretty quick.
Cheers - Stuart.
I heard that the blame should go to you and your montize buddy Scott. However this was from a feed and the details were a but fuzzy. :)
This kind of thing really makes you wonder how easy it would be to affect the US economy through running a serious of bogus stories to make investers react a certain way. I'm with you Steve...wouldn't you check the integrity of a story before acting on the information???
The good news is United did recover, although not back to the original share price, so they still have some work to do. It terms of what it has to do with security, I suppose it's a good example of integrity, all it takes is some incorrect information to make it to the destination without sufficient validation and there is a serious issue. Security is all about the human element as much as it's about the bits and bytes moving around near the speed of light. I don't think there should be any blame for what is seemly a simple but expensive mistake, it could have been a lot bigger, so better it happens now while the impact is manageable and considering the state of the global economy we did ok. The focus should be on process or self improvement, I believe finger pointing and blaming is often a waste energy, finding the moment in time that set off the sequence of events won’t change the past and in some cases won’t make the current situation any less painless but it can be used to alter the future hopefully for the better.