Final thoughts on Ubiquiti (krebsonsecurity.com)

Article summary

The article appears to be a retraction of previous statements made about Ubiquiti, with the author apologizing for any harm caused. The comments suggest that the author was sued by Ubiquiti for $425,000 in damages and that the retraction was part of a settlement. The original statements were based on information from a source who was later found to be implicated in a crime, and the author is criticized for not disclosing this information. The retraction is seen as a positive step, but some commenters feel that it does not go far enough in acknowledging the author's mistakes.

Main themes

• journalistic ethics
• source verification
• cybercrime reporting
• reputation and credibility
• settlement and apology
• media manipulation
• fact-checking and accountability

What commenters say

• The author's retraction is a positive step, but it comes too late and does not fully acknowledge the harm caused.
• The use of criminal sources is not inherently wrong, but it requires careful verification and disclosure of potential biases.
• The author's handling of the situation has damaged their reputation and credibility.
• The retraction is likely the result of a settlement, and the author's apology is seen as insincere by some.
• The author should have been more careful in verifying the information and disclosing the source's potential motives.
• The situation highlights the challenges of reporting on cybercrime and the need for journalists to be aware of potential manipulation.
• The author's mistake was not just a matter of incorrect information, but also a failure to disclose important context.
• The retraction is seen as a necessary step, but it does not provide a full explanation of what happened or how the author plans to prevent similar mistakes in the future.