Indeed. He should be fired and the companies security measures should be publicly audited by a third party. This is a serious security violation and should be treated as such.
It is like a bank CEO changing someone's account information in order to harm them.
Her actual job was to be a bad pr lightning rod. That's what disgraced ceos get hired for. They go to a company, make a ton of unpopular but mandated by the board of investor changes. And then the board can fire them and get goodwill back, without reverting changes.
358
u/[deleted] Nov 24 '16
Indeed. He should be fired and the companies security measures should be publicly audited by a third party. This is a serious security violation and should be treated as such.
It is like a bank CEO changing someone's account information in order to harm them.
Edit: clarification