AT&T Leaks Emails Addresses of 114,000 iPad Users 284
Hugh Pickens writes "Daily Tech reports that in what is one of the biggest leaks of email addresses in recent history, a group called Goatse Security has published the personal email addresses of 114,067 iPad 3G purchasers in what appears to be a legal fashion by querying a public interface that AT&T accidentally left exposed. Apparently AT&T left a script on its public website, which when handed an ICC-ID would respond back with the email address of the subscriber. This apparently was intended for an AJAX-style response inside AT&T's web apps. Gawker reports that it's possible that confidential information about every iPad 3G owner in the US has been exposed. 'This is going to hurt the telecommunications company's already poor image with iPhone and iPad customers, and complicate its very profitable relationship with Apple,' writes Ryan Tate, adding that the leak is likely to unnerve customers thinking of buying iPads that connect to AT&T's cellular network. 'Although the security vulnerability was confined to AT&T servers, Apple bears responsibility for ensuring the privacy of its users, who must provide the company with their email addresses to activate their iPads.' In a statement, AT&T says that the issue was escalated to the highest levels of the company and that it has essentially turned off the feature that provided the email addresses. 'We are continuing to investigate and will inform all customers whose email addresses and ICC IDS may have been obtained,' says AT&T. 'We take customer privacy very seriously and while we have fixed this problem, we apologize to our customers who were impacted.'"
Bad joke (Score:5, Funny)
Wait, the iPad suffered a leak? That's why you always buy pads with wings. (groan)
MadTV predated Ipad (Score:2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsjU0K8QPhs [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think there is a pad big enough! I mean have you seen the goatse guy?!
Re:Bad joke (Score:5, Interesting)
It's going to become news when this hits the courts:
Since when [slashdot.org] does the interface being public [slashdot.org] have anything to do with whether accessing it is legal? The law makes statements about authorized and unauthorized access, not technically possible and technically impossible access. In all hacking crimes the system is happily serving up content exactly as built by the designers, but it's still a crime. In many cases, the system is even working as intended (no buffer overflows and the like) but if unauthorized access is obtained, it's still a crime.
Does anyone else remember this case [zdnet.co.uk] that was on slashdot some years ago? A computer security consultant was convicted in the UK for typing "/../../" after a URL and hitting enter. Obviously this destroyed his career.
This is the text of the law that convicted him.
Re:Bad joke (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Bad joke (Score:5, Insightful)
So if you forget to lock your house door or window, or a car door, or accidentally leave a window open, etc, it's ok for anybody to enter your house and look around?
Not a perfect analog at all as on the web such access can be committed easily and accidentally, but I think the point remains.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
So when you click on a link, are you sure the website allows you to access it?
Nobody "broke in" anything. They requested the service, the server gave it to them. I don't see any illegality here.
Re:Bad joke (Score:4, Insightful)
That's exactly the problem.
Randomly searching directories for non-listed files? Is that a problem? What about typing "/private" to the end of a URL and finding something?
For instance with this story, it's not clear how the hacking group found the script in question. If it's not publicly listed is it a problem? The second it started returning what is obviously non-public information, is that a problem?
I completely agree that stumbling across something private on a public website is easy to do. But if the "stumbler" has to do a lot of work to stumble on the information...? (and I absolutely DON'T excuse AT&T for this leak either)
Re:Bad joke (Score:4, Insightful)
Nothing of that should be illegal. Come on, you can set up basic authentication in Apache in five lines in .htaccess [cyberciti.biz].
Any URL that doesn't require authentication should be fair game, imho. Anything less than that and we start going on a grey area and the 'net turns into a unsafe place where you can be illegal just by clicking a link.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
we start going on a grey area and the 'net turns into a unsafe place where you can be illegal just by clicking a link.
We're already there [cnet.com].
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The difference is sending a GET request to some URL is something we are supposed to do even without asking. This is a link [ethnologue.com]. How are you supposed to know if you can legally click it? Do you check with the domain owner of every link to see if you have permission before you click it?
The difference between a GET request and a malformed packet/running code on other's servers is that the GET is a legal, safe action that everyone on the web does hundreds of times per day.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Given they wrote a script to automatically generate SIM IDs which could then be passed to retrieve another email address, I suspect they were well aware that this was data they should not be accessing.
There was no need to retrieve over 100,000 addresses before notifying AT&T nor was there any need to share the security hole with others as was also done.
The leak shouldn't have been there, but the responsible thing to do upon discovery is report it, not exploit it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There was no need to retrieve over 100,000 addresses before notifying AT&T nor was there any need to share the gaping security hole with others as was also done.
http://security.goatse.fr/ [goatse.fr]
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
They might as well have called themselves "We Publish Snuff Videos Security Group."
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So if you forget to lock your house door or window, or a car door, or accidentally leave a window open, etc, it's ok for anybody to enter your house and look around?
Not a perfect analog at all as on the web such access can be committed easily and accidentally, but I think the point remains.
I usually just pass these type of posts by, but I must say that walking into someones house or climbing in a windows is totally, not even close to accessing a PUBLIC interface on a web site.
A house or a window is quite obvious that you don't belong, but come on, how are you supposed to know that a PUBLIC interface was NOT meant to be PUBLIC.
Give me a freaking break. The point is pointless.....
Re: (Score:2)
So if a store has an "OPEN" sign out front but nobody in watching everything it's ok to walk in and take what you want?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I had a friend who did that a great deal.
The world friend being used with a good deal of imagination as well.
Often he would return the merchandise to the store and explain how he wasn't really happy with the goods he acquired. He would then get store credit and usually sale the card off. This is of course all hearsay because I never witnessed the behavior.
Then one day I bumped into my "friend" at a Wal-Mart and I thought it would be a good idea to give him a good friendly greeting.
While next to an attendant
Re: (Score:2)
No goods were stolen though. But are you forbidden to take photos, which would be the closest equivalent?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't make it OK, but it certainly raises the chance of it happening, and one shouldn't be terribly surprised when it does.
That said, the appropriate response would be more along the lines of notifying the company that there's an issue, not publishing the contact info of an eighth of a million of their customers. After all, it's not the customer's fault that AT&T can't get their shit together. Though by all means, expose anyone with at AT&T email address if there's no response to your heads-up
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Bad joke (Score:5, Insightful)
Not only a poor analogy, but not applicable. A private home or car is considered to be a private, exclusive area unless you explicitly know otherwise. A website is the exact opposite-it's like a storefront, or a restaurant, which a reasonable person would presume to be open to the public unless explicitly marked or set up otherwise.
And if you leave the door to your store unlocked after closing time, and I wander in, yes, that's totally acceptable, and I'm not trespassing unless I stay after you explicitly tell me to leave. Until you do, I'm making a reasonable assumption that a normally public place (a website on the public Internet, or a store) is open to the public (no access control mechanism is in place, or the front door of the store is not locked). If you accidentally leave confidential business records laying on the front counter of the store, and I see them there, I'm also doing nothing wrong-you left them in a public area, I just saw what was there.
At some point, yes, you are responsible to take reasonable security precautions. If you leave things in an area that the public is allowed to access, you can hardly yowl and scream when it becomes publicly known. Now, if you keep it in an area that is not normally accessible to the public and clearly is secured, and someone deliberately cracks in, you are much more likely to have a legitimate grievance. But only then, and this is not such a case. It was laying right out in the open for anyone at all to look at, and someone did.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
To reasonably extend your analogy, they didn't come in through the front door - they came through the tradesman entrance. Services (trades) were expected to come through this interface not the general public. It is like testing the front door, finding yes you can come in but no you can't have that information and then finding that they left the services door unlocked and decided to waltz through there and get the information they were previous denied. Both are "public" entrances in the sense that they aren'
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your logic is *extremely* flawed. You seem to lack the most basic understanding how that WWW that you use works.
It’s more like the “thief” standing in front of your house, asking the butler nicely if he could hand him the contents of your safe.
You ask the server nicely.
If the server then tells you what you want to know, (sends you the packets) then that’s the damn fault of the idiot who configured the server this way.
Re:Bad joke (Score:4, Insightful)
So if you forget to lock your house door or window, or a car door, or accidentally leave a window open, etc, it's ok for anybody to enter your house and look around?
A house door or window is a perfect example of something that is "private" in the legal sense of the term.
HTTP, on the other hand, was developed primarily to allow people to publish documents for public consumption. If you place a web server on a network wide open to the public and do not protect access to your documents or indicate that you intended to do so with the equivalent of a "no trespassing" sign, you are giving the public an implicit license to view what you publish. HTTP is a publishing system after all. The similarity between "publish", "public", and "publication" is not coincidental. An implied license means authorization.
The law concerning electronic communications "interception" is relevant here:
"It shall not be unlawful under this chapter or chapter 121 of this title for any person -- (i) to intercept or access an electronic communication made through an electronic communication system that is configured so that such electronic communication is readily accessible to the general public;" (18 USC 2510 (g))
If you operate a web server that is "configured so that such communication is readily accessible to the general public" you have granted an implied license as strong as the one you have to listen to a run of the mill FM radio channel.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You REALLY wouldn't be pissed-off if this was YOUR email address that was published?
I'd be pissed off, yes, but I'd blame AT&T for making it public in the first place, not the person who visited the web page and downloaded it.
Re: (Score:2)
By not putting an access control mechanism on a data interface you are essentially granting everyone access. Whether the courts rule this way has nothing to do with the technical and practical realities of the situation.
But the people who make the laws seldom understand the technical and practical realities of the situation.
The people who exploit them do.
Therefore most written law and court rulings are made with more concern about the motivation, than how easy (in computer terms) something can be done. Because the people most likely to do it are the ones looking to exploit it.
Unlike walking around naked with your curtains open, it's very unlikely a grandmother will happen to glance through 114,000 e-mail addresses.
Re:Bad joke (Score:4, Informative)
>A computer security consultant was convicted in the UK for typing "/../../" after a URL and hitting enter
Wow I just realized what that does.
That's about the lowest definition of "hacking" you can possibly have. It's more like basic literacy.
Re: (Score:2)
There was a bug at one time that did not evaluate security descriptions when using the .. in the path.
Thus, you could use freely accessible content to access private content.
It wasn't a huge number of revisions, but it was somewhat of an annoyance if you had restricted or pay per view content.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
.. or well, scrap the later part, I'm trying to find what the law actually says over at datainspektionen but it's hard to find anything relevant to the security of storing or sharing the personal data. I don't wanna claim too much in case it's not true :/
Re:Bad joke (Score:5, Informative)
Personuppgiftslagen / personal data law [riksdagen.se]
Google translation (enhanced by hand ..)
Safety measures
31 The liable data manager must take appropriate technical and organizational measures to protect the personal data processed. These measures must achieve a level of security that is appropriate with regard to
a) the technical options available,
b) what it would cost to implement the actions;
c) the specific risks involved in the processing of personal data, and
d) how sensitive the treated personal information is.
When the liable data manager uses a personal data assistant, the liable data manager must ensure that the personal data assistant can implement the security measures required and ensure that the personal data assistant actually take those measures.
The regulatory authority may decide on security measures.
Re:Bad joke (Score:5, Informative)
We still call ourselves hackers, and revel in the thrill that outsiders think we are elite master cyber-criminals who get blowjobs while typing quickly on our keyboards, like in that film with Halle Berry.
Goatse? Really? (Score:5, Funny)
Ok, "goatse" in a story, followed by a link... Is anyone really going to click it without hesitation?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
What's even better is that the first 3 words of the headline are "AT&T's Gaping Hole".
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
What's even better is that the first 3 words of the headline are "AT&T's Gaping Hole".
Well, I was rather amused by the fact that "Goatse" "Leaked" something from said "Gaping Hole," I suppose that if you spend all your time playing with your "gaping hole," then something is eventually going to leak.
Re:Goatse? Really? (Score:4, Funny)
Apple CEO Steve Jobs surely won't rest until AT&T's gaping hole is filled,
nuff said
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Goatse? Really? (Score:5, Informative)
I'm not fucking joking.
Additionally, this may be a Slashdot first: The GNAA first post is actually the article itself.
Re:Goatse? Really? (Score:5, Informative)
Ummmm...apparently, actually true [goatse.fr]. It really is a division of the GNAA. Makes me wonder how accurate this story is.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Perhaps we shouldn't spread the story too widely until we have the hole truth. /ducks
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:2)
For those of you who don't get it, Goatse Security is a division of the great Gay Niggers Association of America.
I'm not fucking joking.
Additionally, this may be a Slashdot first: The GNAA first post is actually the article itself.
I see that for myself and I still don't believe you. Or me, for that matter. What has the world come to?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
What has the world come to?
/b/
'nuff said.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
But it turns out that my troll mods may have been deserved: I spelled it out like Gay Niggers Association of America instead of Gay Nigger Association of America, which is correct.
My bad, guys. Keep up the good work. I'd join your public affairs department if I weren't so damn busy these days...
Re: (Score:2)
Oops (Score:2)
AT&T making a technical goof. That _is_ news.
Goatse Security (Score:2, Funny)
Who is in charge of that? Ben Dover?
Oh well... (Score:5, Insightful)
Accidents happen.
Does anyone think this will cost AT&T anything? Not when you've let the NSA use your phone system for illegal wiretaps.
That was the quid and things like this are the quo.
What is mail for again? and how it was sent? (Score:2)
I couldn't imagine why would a telco need user's mail address and how on earth trusts to the user entered mail address.
I also wonder if the infrastructure was using http or httpS for that communication, you know while collecting user mail addresses for some (??) reason.
You know what? It should be Apple to protest this massive leak at first place. Didn't they declare monopoly on location based advertising "to protect user privacy"? Eh, mail address in some organization named itself "goatse", anything worse c
Will consumers actually care? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not a consumer, and least of all a gadget one. I'm a business guy and I like business toys. And when I buy a business toy, I consider the brand and the source, and almost always pay more to get the better source -- especially when the product/service is otherwise identical.
But when have you seen a consumer choose to buy an iPad from a source that's $10 more expensive than another they've found? Anyone here have friends who choose to pay more? Anyone have friends who chose an iPad from not AT&T because they actually thought about the AT&T factor? I'd bet otherwise.
can't put the genie back in the bottle (Score:2)
I'm sure they won't mind!
Oh joy, another spam list... (Score:2, Insightful)
Gawker Being Gawker (Score:2, Insightful)
Gawker reports that it's possible that confidential information about every iPad 3G owner in the US has been exposed.
Is it? Is it really? Or is this just Gawker being Gawker and making things up? Emails, folks. That's it. Emails. You're on some public list alread, emails are not "confidential".
not every iPad owner (Score:2)
Gawker doesn't suggest that "every iPad owner in the US" may have been exposed. It says every iPad 3G owner may have been exposed. I don't think that's splitting hairs, either, given the short time the 3G model has been available. Things are bad enough without making them seem worse.
Re: (Score:2)
At first I thought it said "all 114,000" Ipad owners. Because I don't see them around and there's no way they sold as many as they said they did.
No way. (Score:2, Funny)
The last thing that comes to my mind when I think goatse is security. That guy can't secure shit.
And trust me, I've thought about alot of things while viewing / thinking of goatse..And security was definitely the last because I read an article about it on some site.
Thank you... (Score:4, Insightful)
Why punish the users? (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm surprised nobody else has commented how offensive it is that the group that found the leak published the email addresses. By all means publish the fact of the breach, get pie on AT&T's face, but why punish the users? That's just mean.
Smartphone Developers: Take Note (Score:5, Insightful)
This is certainly a high-profile breach, but not apparently immediately catastrophic. However, it does provide a number of lessons for organizations and developers building smartphone applications (iPhone, iPad, Android, Blackberry, Windows Mobile, etc) All of the issues with the AT&T/Apple infrastructure for the iPad are known web application security issues. Smartphone developers need to learn from the past or they are going to repeat the mistakes of web application and AJAX/RIA application developers.
I put together some more in-depth comments here:
4 Lessons From the AT&T/Apple Data Breach for Smartphone App Developers [denimgroup.com]
--Dan
@danielcornell
Re: (Score:2)
This is certainly a high-profile breach, but not apparently immediately catastrophic.
When you consider that some of this information belongs to people with *.mil email addresses, I think you're underestimating the shit storm that is about to be (well, SHOULD be) unleashed on AT&T and Apple.
On the bright side for Apple users, perhaps Apple can use this to break their exclusivity deal with AT&T? Perhaps Apple will learn the value of 'due diligence' before signing contracts in the future.
Coulda been worse... (Score:2)
...just imagine how much worse it would have been if those iPads had Flash installed...
fist pump (Score:2)
oops, I missed
well, I am on /.
AT&T takes your privacy seriously! (Score:2)
That is truly funny coming from the company that hosts NSA spy rooms.
Good (Score:2)
Now we know who to block to avoid those douche "Sent from my iPad" email footers
I have taken to replying to ANY of these with a "Sent from my Combine Harvester" or similar thing back.
We don't care about your toy. And while we are at it, do you have to mention your iPad in every tweet and email? sheesh.
Sorry. Been a long day.
From the NSA to a wide open port (Score:2)
You had MS Sidekick data loss, Amazon 1984 data removal, Room 641A, googles data collection, now ipad email gape.
Time to buy a Dell streak, install Ubuntu and float on the Canonical cloud.
You will be safe from all but SCO as you hunt for a teclo that takes customer security very seriously.
Corporate-speak (Score:5, Funny)
'We are continuing to investigate and will inform all customers whose email addresses and ICC IDS may have been obtained,' says AT&T. 'We take customer privacy very seriously and while we have fixed this problem, we apologize to our customers who were impacted.'"
A classic textbook non-response from a corporation's P.R. machine. A guide, for those unfamiliar with the terminology:
* "We continue to..." / "We are continuing..." - Translation: We're not doing a thing
* "investigate" - Translation: To lawyer-up and get paperwork straight for a lawsuit
* "may have" - Translation: "did"
* "been obtained" - Translation: given out by us through incompetence
* "We take XYZ very seriously" - Translation: It only comes up in meetings when emergencies happen
* "we have fixed this problem" - Translation: We fired the employees who told us this problem would happen
* "we apologize" - Translation: We admit no legal wrongdoing
* "customers who were impacted" - people who paid us for the pleasure of a good corporate rogering
Why anyone even reads press releases by companies anymore, one can only guess. You'll hear those catch phrases in every one.
Re: (Score:2)
I find the wording "customers who were impacted" interesting. Once something has leaked the problem doesn't go away by only plugging the leak and not cleaning up. Just ask BP.
Re: (Score:2)
"As we said before, this was a mistake”
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/06/google-wifi-debacle/ [wired.com]
Recent history? (Score:2)
Has the Internet really been around long enough to have bigger leaks than this before its "recent history"?
I hate to break it to everyone, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Bad move, Apple (Score:5, Informative)
Contractual obligations. Here [engadget.com]'s some info.
Basically, Apple signed a five-year deal in 2007 because they badly needed a carrier who was willing to sink many millions into the release.
Here's the thing that sucks for early adopters: If you bought in '07, you had to sign a two-year deal with AT&T. Par for the course for a phone the way we've got it structured in the US. But after your two years are up, you'd still be stuck with AT&T for another three years due to the 5-year deal they have with Apple. Either that, or jailbreak your phone, etc.
Practically, though, the extra three years are no big deal for the early adopters... surely most of them would move onto a new phone after two years, since they are early adopters.
Re: (Score:2)
As much as I want my iPhone carrier-unlocked, what other US carrier with GSM/HSDPA and a nationwide footprint do I have access to?
Point being, what am I supposed to do with my newly unlocked iPhone - go to T-Mobile? Not really, at least not in this country. The use I can see for an unlocked US iPhone is simply that were I to travel overseas I could use a local SIM over there and use it with a native carrier instead of getting violated with international roaming fees.
Not having left the States in seven yea
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Bad move, Apple (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Goatse Security (Score:5, Funny)
The funniest part of this entire story is that news organizations are either completely clueless as to what Goatse is, or refuse to mention it.
But some people are going to google it anyway.
The person who leaked this is a true internet superhero.
Re:Goatse Security (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Goatse Security (Score:5, Funny)
"That guy who leaked 114,000 emails? What a big asshole!"
Re: (Score:2)
This is AT&T's security model:
(almost safe for work) http://goatkcd.com/424/sfw [goatkcd.com]
Re:Goatse Security (Score:5, Funny)
The title:
AT&T's Gaping Hole Exposes...
and
... before reporting this gaping hole to AT&T...
and this gem:
Apple CEO Steve Jobs surely won't rest until AT&T's gaping hole is filled
Goatse FTW.
Re:Doesn't Matter (Score:4, Insightful)
why would it affect Apple at all? This was an AT&T issue.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
why would it affect Apple at all? This was an AT&T issue.
I admit, I don't own an iPad so I might be slightly mistaken as to how this works but from the summery it mentions that Apple is the one that 'users, who must provide the company with their email addresses to activate their iPads' which indicates Apple is the wanting the email, not AT&T. Now if Apple wants the emails, why would if have a 3rd party (AT&T) hold on to this data and not just upload it all to their servers every few hours and delete the AT&T server of this information? Now, if Apple
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Was the summary tl;dr for you? And for everyone who modded you up?
Although the security vulnerability was confined to AT&T servers, Apple bears responsibility for ensuring the privacy of its users, who must provide the company with their email addresses to activate their iPads. [emphasis added]
Re: (Score:3)
Did you even read the article?
Re: (Score:2)
You are more right than you know. (Score:5, Funny)
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Re: (Score:2)
I was I had mod points. That was hilarious!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How is that new droid tablet? Oh, they don't have one yet?
Nice try, but actually Archos has had an Android tablet out for months now. And more from other manufacturers (like the MSI WindPad) are slated to come out this year.
Re:Doesn't Matter (Score:5, Insightful)
Since this was a flaw in AT&T's security, despite Gawker's attempt to make it Apple's fault, why the hell would or should it affect Apple's image?
From a source not being sued by Apple for theft
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/198453/should_you_worry_about_the_ipad_3g_data_leak.html [pcworld.com]
Re: (Score:3)
From the summary: 'Although the security vulnerability was confined to AT&T servers, Apple bears responsibility for ensuring the privacy of its users, who must provide the company with their email addresses to activate their iPads.'
If I give you my car keys, and you give them to someone else, and that person steals it, you can't claim it's not your fault. Y
Re: (Score:2)
Since the iPad/AT&T users actually gave their email addresses directly to AT&T through the sign-up web form, your analogy is a bit off. A better one is of a restaraunt that contracts with a specific vallet parking company. You give your keys to the valet company and they ding your car. The restaraunt is certainly in some way involved (having chosen the valet company), but at no time were they directly responcible.
Cough (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.citrix.com/English/ps2/products/product.asp?contentID=1689163 [citrix.com]
"Citrix makes it easy to use enterprise applications, including Windows applications, on your iPhone, Blackberry, Android and Windows mobile devices on-demand."
Re: (Score:2)
Have you actually TRIED using a desktop app on a smartphone, doesn't work very well at all. The ipad is almost exactly the right size for a portable tablet which makes desktop UI apps usable.
Then it ought to work just fine on one of the Android tablets that's already out, or one of the ones coming out later this year.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm guessing they named the company as such in hopes of getting a headline like this.
Re: (Score:2)
If you need to worry about the NSA, you have a good sneaker net in place or know you are totally compromised.
ATT, Google, the NSA, fusion centers ect are a fact of life. But AT&T should have known better. They have a monopoly, the funds, skill set and understand US law.
They seemed to have protected Room 641A rather well, how about protecting consumer data too
Real networks need real admins, not just Idiots Ou
Re: (Score:2)