Wow, if I was a customer, I'd be dropping them immediately even if I didn't pirate. That is sketchy as hell.
this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2024
85 points (96.7% liked)
Technology
34891 readers
34 users here now
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
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.
What a weird set of events. It's not even clear what was actually used as infection method.
Why would a telecom company care what the content of the bits they are being paid to transmit?
The volume I can understand.