Originally by: CCP Sreegs

---

Originally by: Bomberlocks

---

Originally by: CCP Navigator

---

Thread has been cleaned up a little.

I wanted to quickly address one or two concerns, specifically over personal information and logins. At no stage were other players able to access your login, passwords, payment details or real life information.

CCP Sreegs has already stated that he is writing a blog on this subject and this is one of the things he will cover.

---

I would like to post a few pertinent facts:
- The person who was banned petitioned the vulnerability to CCP. It was not acted upon.
- Said person then proceeded to demonstrate that vulnerability after discussing it on the now-defunct SHC forums.
- Said person was banned for impersonating someone who was not himself.
- The forums were taken down.
- The forums were brought back up and CCP Fallout asserted that the vulnerabilities had been patched and "We would like to reiterate that your personal details and billing information have not been compromised, and that your eve online account was not at risk".
- The banned person then proceed to post, as himself, inspite of him being banned, in reply to CCP Fallout's assertion, thereby proving Fallout's assertion to be false.
- The forums were then taken down again.
- The forums brought back up a while later.
- Later on, I presume after having discovered that the forums were still vulnerable, they were taken down again.
- The old forums were brought back up.
- Discussions involving said banned person are closed with further threats of banning, ignoring the fact that the story has already been widely spread, on other forums, Facebook, twitter and probably the media as well (slashdot for example).
- You now claim, again, that customer data was never at risk.

In light of that information, how do you expect us to believe your current assertion without a transparent and open discussion of the vulnerability? The banned person can easily post his version any else he chooses, and given his disproving of CCP's earlier assertions, I presume that the benefit of the doubt will go to him.

The ball, I think, is in your court.

---

We don't discuss administrative actions. At all. Ever. No matter how many times you ask, demand or otherwise say the same thing over and over and over again. Our policy is simply that we don't, and to be fair you only have access to enough information to speculate.

I'm not claiming. I'm stating outright that customer data was never at risk. We've also said there will be a blog which will detail what occurred and what was wrong.

---