23-01-2015 19:21 - edited 23-01-2015 19:22
23-01-2015 19:21 - edited 23-01-2015 19:22
on 07-02-2015 11:43
Hi thanks @WispaRed7 yes going to get in touch with @piperdog123. Not well atm which is why I've been quiet but soon as I'm better I will start chasing this again
sad that you are not well atm hope you're feeling better asap @Anonymous
on 07-02-2015 13:41
on 07-02-2015 13:41
on 07-02-2015 17:03
on 07-02-2015 17:13
on 07-02-2015 17:13
Nor surprisingly, the only Google reference for that phone number (+16617330814) is here :
http://wiki-numbers.ru/world/phone/6617330/
on 07-02-2015 17:14
on 07-02-2015 17:14
on 07-02-2015 17:17
on 07-02-2015 17:17
Perhaps O2 have been advised not to confirm whose database has been hacked.....from a legal point of view they may not want to name the company that has released their customers' personal data :smileywink::smileywink:
on 07-02-2015 17:32
on 07-02-2015 17:32
All I know is...if, as we suspect, personal data has been 'hacked into'.....then they are just allowing it to continue if they are saying 'Not our fault Guv'
Veritas Numquam Perit
on 07-02-2015 18:28
on 07-02-2015 18:28
To be fair to O2, it may not have been their database that was hacked.
We have suggested perhaps the Phones4U database was released into the public domain......that is not O2's responsibility but if they know that is what happened or suspect that is what happened then legally they cannot say so.
on 07-02-2015 18:34
on 07-02-2015 18:34
on 07-02-2015 18:45
on 07-02-2015 18:45
I agree but ICO will not look upon O2 as having released the data if a 3rd party was hacked.
I believe that's why O2 have phrased their statements as they have. Also probably explains why O2 have notified ICO "out of courtesy" because although it involved their customers' data, O2 did not release it.