There is no reason why blippy should have been able to expose credit card numbers to Google’s crawler. Any person who’s handled credit card numbers knows that this type of security problem is impossible to have if you’re PCI (Payment Card Industry) compliant.
Basically, it’s illegal to store…
Blippy was always a disaster waiting to happen. That screwup may have been bad, but their brain-dead, tone-deaf response is really the match thrown to the powder keg.
“It’s not as bad as it looks” is the kind of thing a husband caught in his underwear with his secretary in a similar state of undress says. “We are serious about security” No, you’re not just serious. It is OF UTMOST IMPORTANCE to you, it is YOUR NUMBER ONE CONCERN. “It might look super scary” — hey geniuses, if you did a Venn diagram showing the overlap between the kind of people who can be trusted with credit card info, and the kind of people who use the expression “super scary” in a corporate text meant for public consumption, there would be NO overlap.
Fucking amateur hour. How much did these guys raise, again? Welcome to Silicon Valley excess. It’s always sad to see someone’s startup drive to a wall and hit the accelerator, but this is one I just might enjoy watching go down in flames.
Notes about this post from the Tumblr community:
-
caterpillarcowboy said:
I wonder what Mint.com’s response would have been to a similar situation. They’ve always had an intense focus on security and brand.
-
pegobry reblogged this from mikehudack and added:
Blippy was always a disaster waiting to happen. That screwup may have been bad, but their brain-dead, tone-deaf response...
-
michaeljung liked this
-
david liked this
-
kylewritescode liked this
-
jratlee reblogged this from mikehudack and added:
i didn’t like blippy from the moment i heard about them and this is exactly why.
-
mikehudack reblogged this from allang
-
allang posted this
