←back to thread

410 points gpi | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.616s | source
Show context
neilv ◴[] No.43996445[source]
The article keeps saying overseas employees or contractors, but isn't more specific on who Coinbase entrusted with this sensitive customer PII.

The bottom line is Coinbase didn't adequately secure sensitive customer information, and it was leaked.

Not, "Gosh, 'overseas' people, what can ya do?"

replies(12): >>43996466 #>>43996524 #>>43996557 #>>43996649 #>>43996661 #>>43996746 #>>43997312 #>>43997316 #>>43997530 #>>43997817 #>>43997825 #>>43998830 #
kragen ◴[] No.43996557[source]
It's probably hard to keep call-center workers bribe-proof.
replies(9): >>43996618 #>>43996626 #>>43996651 #>>43996654 #>>43996807 #>>43997178 #>>43997271 #>>43997359 #>>43997458 #
orionsbelt ◴[] No.43996618[source]
Yes, but I do think an organization like Coinbase or a cell phone carrier - which are extreme targets of fraud - have an obligation to recognize that their employees are targets and implement greater security measures than most organizations. Maybe Coinbase should even pay higher wages and use onshore customer service agents.
replies(1): >>43996640 #
1. kragen ◴[] No.43996640[source]
Well, it sounds like they do implement greater security measures than most organizations.
replies(1): >>43997153 #
2. CryptoBanker ◴[] No.43997153[source]
Doesn't matter when Coinbase still got exploited
replies(1): >>43997190 #
3. kragen ◴[] No.43997190[source]
In a broad sense I agree, but it does matter to orionsbelt's comment.