Investigation in Liverpool's 'hacking' of our computer systems

[Centurions]

This is something we may never know. It may be that City knew and unofficially condoned login sharing as such devolving blame from the users, or they know it was a user error but valued him high enough to retain him, after all once the leak was stopped his skills would be no less devalued.

I highly doubt that login sharing (officially or unofficially) was used, there was just too much money involved.

More likely is that the email address (presuming that's the user name) would have been easy enough and they could have simply guessed at the password depending on how rigorous Newman was in password reuse. For instance try the name of your dog and add 1234 to the https://haveibeenpwned.com/Passwords website and be worried. Blue1234 & blue1234 are even worse.

 

[Marvin]

Only City & Liverpool signed the non-disclosure agreement, not the media. Papers frequently publish pieces under the heading of 'as reported in...' which is their legal get-out clause.

Simon Mullock tweeted how the Liverpool legal team put pressure on them back in 2013.

But now that the Times published it, why don't other titles reference it? I think they could freely do so as long as they don't make new allegations but they choose not to for editorial reasons.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

They used the credentials of someone who was still at the club. They did not and i repeat did not use their own credentials they had whilst at the club. They stole his login details and used that. Now that you should see it differwntly would ypu like to amend the rest of the bullshit

And they did it hundreds of times during a period when both clubs were competing for the same transfer targets. It is a criminal offence and the person who did it was promoted to Head of Recruitment at Liverpool FC. Tony Evans says Liverpool were just "being stupid" just like they were when they carried out an organised smear campaign against our club in the media in the USA and here. How stupid must anyone be to believe that?

 

[cheekybids]

then its best leaving it suggestive rather than implying its happened with others.

I can’t be arsed looking back but it was meant to be “suggestive”. Apologies if it wasn’t.

 

[Centurions]

But now that the Times published it, why don't other titles reference it? I think they could freely do so as long as they don't make new allegations but they choose not to for editorial reasons.

No idea bud, I don't know if @tolmie's hairdoo has ever commented on that being closer to the source (pun intended)

@smevchenko the original thread on this was started in 2013 and ran up until December last year, there's a lot more information probably in there but it is 202 pages long.

https://forums.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk/...lement-for-hacking-biggest-pl-scandal.342352/

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Not really, the main argument is that City did not pursue the matter, or even make the authorities aware of the matter. Although the articles I have read on the subject do not state which credentials were used, their own from previous employment at City, or someone else still employed by City. I agree there is a big difference between the two, and would make the matter more serious, but then also raises questions as to why City did not inform the FA.

In articles I and others have read, the person whose login they used was named as Rob Newman, who was working for City at that time. And there is no difference between the two. Unauthorised access to a computer system is a criminal offence, however you do it.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I hope there is an official investigation into the matter, but based on how seriously you view the matter, what are your opinions on City's stance at the time? Does it not seem strange?

Have you considered that we approached the authorities, who then encouraged us to keep it out of the public domain and brokered this deal? The PL Handbook expressly talks about avoiding going to law wherever possible so I'd say the scenario I've outlined is very plausible.

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

I highly doubt that login sharing (officially or unofficially) was used, there was just too much money involved.

More likely is that the email address (presuming that's the user name) would have been easy enough and they could have simply guessed at the password depending on how rigorous Newman was in password reuse. For instance try the name of your dog and add 1234 to the https://haveibeenpwned.com/Passwords website and be worried. Blue1234 & blue1234 are even worse.

Personally I disagree because that would have been confirmed hacking and a simple case to prove in a court, City could have had the perpetrators punished and they have chosen not to do so.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

It would still have been theft had they used their old logins. The staff allegedly involved at LFC weren't sacked, they were promoted and are in significant positions, and LFC are believed to have acted on the information. The material in the Times alleges that City have forensic evidence that LFC staff over a period of 6 months accessed sensitive commercial information from Manchester City. It's also been alleged that Liverpool moved on City's target and that is how the problem was identified and hence City's protests to LFC.

If these reports are true, we're not talking about deduction of a few points, we're talking about expulsion from the Premier League, huge fines and personal sanctions. The question is whether the FA and Premier League have the bottle to do it. I feel they will have no choice. The press know, even the Parliamentary sub-committee on culture and sport know about it (and demanded an official enquiry). It wont go away much as Liverpool want it too. And I don't see how it can be buried. If it is, then the FA will themselves come under scrutiny.[/QUOT

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

It would still have been theft had they used their old logins. The staff allegedly involved at LFC weren't sacked, they were promoted and are in significant positions, and LFC are believed to have acted on the information. The material in the Times alleges that City have forensic evidence that LFC staff over a period of 6 months accessed sensitive commercial information from Manchester City. It's also been alleged that Liverpool moved on City's target and that is how the problem was identified and hence City's protests to LFC.

If these reports are true, we're not talking about deduction of a few points, we're talking about expulsion from the Premier League, huge fines and personal sanctions. The question is whether the FA and Premier League have the bottle to do it. I feel they will have no choice. The press know, even the Parliamentary sub-committee on culture and sport know about it (and demanded an official enquiry). It wont go away much as Liverpool want it too. And I don't see how it can be buried. If it is, then the FA will themselves come under scrutiny.

I wouldn't trust anything produced by the Government's committee on Culture and Sport. In 2011 they produced a report on Football Governance which looked closely at clubs' finances and the future of the game. It was the usual propaganda which criticised City and Chelsea for inflating costs and gave a free pass to the cartel clubs. None of its recommendations were carried out and its job was made harder when a draft copy of it was leaked to the press. The key special adviser to the committee was a certain Rick Parry and he was one of those involved in the subsequent leak inquiry. See this official report https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmcumeds/1638/163810.htm