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

[Centurions]

That backs up my point, if Liverpool are threatening to sue then how can you expect any paper to print it when they themselves have noproof and given the NDA won't ever get it?

No it doesn't.

The Times are quite happy to print it and I've seen nothing of Liverpools lawyers kicking off? And as I said, the other papers can happily print that 'The Times are reporting...' as a cop out (as far as I'm aware anyway, it's certainly been used many times previously).

Edit: BTW the NDA hasn't stopped the FA asking City for their views and any information on it and then going to Liverpool with what we've given them and asking for their views now. It also won't stop any criminal investigation as we're not the USA (happily).

 

[nmc]

Whatever, mate. All I am saying is if an ex employee took data from my company without permission and I could prove it, I would ensure they got a criminal record for their CV. If I had left data unsecured I might be a bit more cautious.

People who don’t lock their windows are asking to be burgled? Seems to be your principle. Two Liverpool employees have been hacking into the computer system of a rival club. That’s a crime, it’s cheating and no amounting of pointing the finger at City’s internal security lessons the crime. Whatever next. The signing of teams in MLB wasn’t very good so the Boston Red Sox we’re allowed to study it and communicate it to their players FFS.

 

[TheThirdDeano]

So

Whatever, mate. All I am saying is if an ex employee took data from my company without permission and I could prove it, I would ensure they got a criminal record for their CV. If I had left data unsecured I might be a bit more cautious.

So you think the fact that the PL request all teams refrain from taking legal actions (as referenced in quite a few posts in here) is less likely to affect what city do than city blaming themselves?

 

[wahablue]

Bolton didn’t,t pay the wages,players go on strike,FA deduct points,wages then paid in full ,did the FA give Bolton the points back,did they .... Littlewoods staff broke the law hundreds of times over a 6-8 months period,which is the worst offence Bolton’s or Littlewoods

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

No, the way the passwords were obtained is wholly irrelevant. It is the act of unauthorised access that is the criminal offence. You don't need to be an IT nerd to know that accessing information without the permission of the asset owner (in this case City) whose employment you have left, is not only morally wrong but illegal.

And that's before we know what screen warnings about unauthorised access are on the system when you login.

In terms of the period before they left, that is incorrect. When you give an employee a login and password you inherently grant them access to the data on that system. If the username and password is shared between users then the giver takes on responsibility of the act, not the receiver. If they do so without permission then they are the culprit. If the company has not forbidden the act of sharing then they share responsibility for any consequences.

Jesus, this is why NHS trusts, banks etc get fined for data breaches, they've allowed sensitive data to be taken.

 

[nmc]

Whatever, mate. All I am saying is if an ex employee took data from my company without permission and I could prove it, I would ensure they got a criminal record for their CV. If I had left data unsecured I might be a bit more cautious.

So a banker leaves Goldman Sachs for JPMorgan. He uses a former colleagues login details to access research data back at Goldman. Who’s to blame? When the shit hits the fan? The FCA would probably ban the banker for life from working in the ‘City’ and fine JPMorgan. Goldman’s might get told to tighten their security but they would not be in the spotlight. It is the individual who’s committed a criminal offence and JP Morgan get fined if they have profited or secured a competitive advantage from the actions of their employee. In this scenario the banker would be fired... no doubt. He would not get promoted.

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

So a banker leaves Goldman Sachs for JPMorgan. He uses a former colleagues login details to access research data back at Goldman. Who’s to blame? When the shit hits the fan? The FCA would probably ban the banker for life from working in the ‘City’ and fine JPMorgan. Goldman’s might get told to tighten their security but they would not be in the spotlight. It is the individual who’s committed a criminal offence and JP Morgan get fined if they have profited or secured a competitive advantage from the actions of their employee. In this scenario the banker would be fired... no doubt. He would not get promoted.

The original bank would be in a data breach situation (and probably face severe fines), the banker would be put in jail for fraud, the former colleague would be investigated to ascertain if he shared his login details.

Now, ask me how the original bank will stop this.

 

[nmc]

The original bank would be in a data breach situation (and probably face severe fines), the banker would be put in jail for fraud, the former colleague would be investigated to ascertain if he shared his login details.

Now, ask me how the original bank will stop this.

No they wouldn’t. I worked at Goldman. The original contract of employment and the termination of employment letter are very clear about an employees responsibilities both during employment and post employment. Under this scenario Goldman’s will have done nothing wrong. The ex employee will have breached his or her contractual obligations by continuing to use intellectual property that he or she had gained during their employment and they would have signed to say he or she would not continue to use it post employment. You can’t necessarily forget what you know but you have a moral (legal) and contractual obligation to act with impunity when you leave an employer. I was heavily involved in the investigation of a case relating to the son of Jeffrey Archer who was convicted of insider trading whilst at CSFB - I won’t go into the case but accusations of poor internal security were brushed away and the Stockholm, London and New York Stock Exchanges through the book at the individuals involved.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

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?

One possible take on that is that at the time involved we may have had a different perception of the possibility of us being accepted into the fold.
Perhaps we thought by solving the issue between the clubs as suggested by the PL, that we felt we could protect ourselves going forward by gentlemanly agreement.

If so, how wrong we were.
We should go all Churchill on their collective asses. We will not negotiate with that club. Or UEFA for that matter.

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

No they wouldn’t. I worked at Goldman. The original contract of employment and the termination of employment letter are very clear about an employees responsibilities both during employment and post employment. Under this scenario Goldman’s will have done nothing wrong. The ex employee will have breached his or her contractual obligations by continuing to use intellectual property that he or she had gained during their employment and they would have signed to say he or she would not continue to use it post employment. You can’t necessarily forget what you know but you have a moral (legal) and contractual obligation to act with impunity when you leave an employer. I was heavily involved in the investigation of a case relating to the son of Jeffrey Archer who was convicted of insider trading whilst at CSFB - I won’t go into the case but accusations of poor internal security were brushed away and the Stockholm, London and New York Stock Exchanges through the book at the individuals involved.

You are saying anyone can hack into a bank, take data and it's NOT a data breach? My banking experience is only via Barclays so I cannot say how other banks operate but I'd be extremely worried if that isn't classed as a data breach. Banks are subject to fines for data breaches and they have to report any breach to the authorities.

EDIT: Perhaps the fact it was research data meant it wasn't classed as a data breach. There have been many, many changes in recent years too, so if it was some time ago that might be a reason.