@attritionorg @Mandiant it’s not for marketing; it’s for classification. More than one group etc.
-
-
-
@wgragido
@Mandiant Yes, that is part of my point. Labeling them "1" is ignorant in terms of classification, great for marketing. -
@attritionorg@Mandiant “1” has an internal relevance I’m sure. They could have used crypto nomes but opted for numerical notation. -
@wgragido
@Mandiant Yes. And 1 implies first, which is *ignorant*. This isn't even the first documented to some degree. -
@attritionorg@Mandiant I don’t think they were ranking it first as in priority. I could be wrong though, I don’t work there.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
RT
@attritionorg: ... calling them "APT1" certainly speaks to their marketing drive behind this. < pessimistic view -
@WhyIsThisOpen Not a pessimist for knowing they aren't the first documented "APT" group out there.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.