Photo by Esther Lin via All Elbows.
When hackers angered by the UFC's support of unpopular anti-piracy legislation first took down UFC.com, UFC president Dana White was cavalier. He tweeted "I'm in the fight biz not the website biz. Who gives a ****?" Now that the company has had some more time, they've issued a formal statement on the matter:
"On Sunday, January 22nd, the UFC.com website was redirected by a criminal hacker to another website," a statement provided to MMA Fighting read. "The UFC website was quickly restored to the control of the UFC, and there is no evidence suggesting that any confidential information belonging to the company or its customers was compromised by the re-direction of the website. UFC representatives are continuing to investigate the matter and are working with law enforcement agents to prosecute those involved."
MMA Fighting's Ben Fowlkes took White to task for his response and answered White's hypothetical about who might care about the web site hack:
One answer might be: fans who have given the UFC their credit card information at some point in the past. Between online pay-per-view purchases, merchandise, and UFC Fight Club subscriptions, thousands of fans have no doubt passed important confidential information to the UFC through one of its websites, and those people might have liked a little extra reassurance from the public face of the company.
By comparison, after online shoe retailer Zappos.com was hacked earlier this month and the information for a reported 24 million accounts exposed, the company quickly sent out an email to customers to alert them to the situation and advise them to change their login and password information on any other site where they used "a same or similar password." Zappos also reassured customers that the "database that stores your critical credit card and other payment data was NOT affected or accessed."
MMA Payout points out why this issue may come back to haunt the UFC:
While the UFC will be concerned from an online security perspective, it should also look at it from a PR perspective. For the UFC, this may not be as easy as it seems. The UFC has been aggressive in its stance against illegal streaming and distribution of its fights. In supporting SOPA and PIPA, it sees legislation that can assist in its fight against online piracy. But, opposition to the laws, which include many young, internet savvy individuals - the same people that likely follow Dana White and many other UFC fighters on twitter, utilize social media and embrace the online community oppose the restrictions that would come with the proposed laws. We will see how SOPA and PIPA will evolve and if the UFC will continue to support it.
0 recs | 65 comments
I hate SOPA as much as the next guy
I’m not sure this is going to persuade the powers that be to end their support of the Bill, though.
dajulzta - January 24, 2012 via Android app
And by this I mean the actions taken on the promotion's site.
I’m not dumping on your writing, Mr. Wilcox.
dajulzta - January 24, 2012 via Android app
the bill has been pulled in both the house and senate
even before the UFC wrote the op-ed. that’s the really curious part about it. It’s very rare for a company to come out strongly in favor of a deeply unpopular bill that’s already failed. Not a lot of #win in that approach.
Kid Nate - January 24, 2012
I can’t keep up but unless something has happened in the last week…
SOPA Markup is to resume in February
And there’s also a similar bill in Europe called ACTA.
Zachary Kater - January 24, 2012
nope, you're right.
Its going to be a revised SOPA bill. Which, frankly, I don’t mind- there is absolutely a way to create a piece of legislation that isn’t unconstitutionally broad, while still keeping the internet functioning.
The government is going to pass some form of SOPA, so be prepared; but there’s no way it will be in its current form.
Body Triangle - January 24, 2012
actually you dont need any bill
when the fuck did people think losing freedoms was cool because it would “help us”? oh thats right. when they started watching jersey shore
silent.bisonte33 - January 24, 2012
When people decided to enter into society.
Body Triangle - January 25, 2012
At least Dana didn’t call anyone a dumbfuck in that tweet. Baby steps on the twitter, I guess.
They really have had such a weird response to this whole thing.
Earl Montclair - January 24, 2012
I see this as Dana and Crew first having no clue that their site got hacked, second when they got a clue
they didn’t want to give ammunition to the group that hacked them. Thus I figure the nonchalant way of dealing with it. Its a no big deal approach because we can fix it right away. However this approach may not be effective and give people doubts in your ability to withstand this kind of sabotage.
dandeman - January 24, 2012
Just another example..
Of White being too arrogant for his own good. As much as people champion Dana’s “cavalier” attitude and straight-forwardness, it’s only a matter of time before he slips up big. The more cameras that follow him around, the more opportunities there will be for him to say something offensive, especially with him always running around hopped up on Red Bull with no sleep. It’s bound to happen, and it won’t be good when it does…
TheBlackChip - January 24, 2012
Oh no… people might get offended at something? Alert the red cross!
Stanlee - January 24, 2012
This! It is only a matter of time before Dana calls someone a f@ggot or c**ty
…Oh wait
ThatsHowIRoll - January 24, 2012
Pretty sure it was made clear from the beginning that it was a redirection, and not that the UFC website had been hacked, per say. There is a difference. One indicates that users never reach the real UFC.com, while the other indicates that the UFC.com servers have been hacked and actual data is at risk.
Shnak - January 24, 2012
Denial of Service attacks
Have no risk of taking confidential information.
Stiff Jab - January 24, 2012
Exactly
Anyone complaining about credit card data has no idea what they are talking about. And who wants to follow a twitter account that issues scripted company tag lines? If u don’t want a dose of reality why do you follow him?
TheMushroomWizard - January 24, 2012 via iPhone app
It's up to the UFC to reassure their customer base
And not assume they know their information is not effected.
KJ Gould - January 24, 2012
Is redirecting a website the same as a DoS?
I didn’t take enough schooling for this stuff. I thought a DoS just flooded a server in order to make it impossible for other legitimate users to connect through DNS.
Zachary Kater - January 24, 2012
You are correct
They are claiming a DNS redirect.
Which doesn’t explain the Twitter hijacking.
asa - January 24, 2012
This is going to come back and bite the UFC in the ass
Their already suffering PPV numbers will suffer more due to the fact that they support SOPA/PIPA.
Dr Mcsexy - January 24, 2012
If you’re not buying PPV events because of some political BS, then you’re not a very big MMA fan…
Shnak - January 24, 2012
You can be a big MMA fan and not buy PPV.
I won’t buy another PPV from them if they continue to support draconian bills like SOPA and PIPA. If you think those bills are just some political BS, then i suggest you read more about them and see how they would fundementally change the internet and your voice on it.
As a consumer i’m going to speak with my $$ and my $$ will no longer support Zuffa and their short sightedness.
I can’t imagine what would happen to this webpage if SOPA or PIPA were passed
Clay Davis - January 24, 2012
Hopefully you’re not justifying pirating, the problem that caused these ridiculous bills, as a solution for their stance on the laws.
Zachary Kater - January 24, 2012
just go to a bar instead
Rob Young - January 24, 2012
Yeah, there’s nothing wrong with that, but I’m not sure it would actually help, other than giving moral satisfaction for not directly contributing to a company that supports something you don’t approve of.
Zachary Kater - January 24, 2012
See, in my opinion, that's the problem.
While obtaining content against the distributor’s wishes may constitute pirating, or even theft, the truth is that its theft only in the old sense of the word.
I said it before, but the internet has drastically changed the business paradigm. Particularly, its affected content distributors and creators. Supporters of SOPA typically fall under the category of “Entrenched content producers/distributors”, who are seeking to protect their old business model. That’s a model that, in the internet age at least, no longer functions.
So yes- technically, it is piracy. But these businesses have to find a way to deal with it in a new way.
No, I don’t support “piracy” per say; but I do support businesses adapting without throwing people in jail.
BTW- this is not meant to be snarky! Just a (hopefully) informed opinion.
Body Triangle - January 24, 2012
It’s an interesting debate. Especially when you think of a situation like MegaUpload which got shut down. Corporations want to complain that their “property” is being “stolen”, but for some reason can lead the government to effectively destroy users of that site’s personal property without any repercussions.
The idea of labeling the redistribution of digital content as stealing isn’t something I really agree with.
Zachary Kater - January 24, 2012
bingo.
For me, labeling it as “stealing” has really changed the terms of the debate. In my opinion, it really shouldn’t be labeled as such.
Megaupload is a particularly interesting case. While they were distributing copyrighted content, the reason they were taken down wasn’t due only to their copyright infringement. Megaupload was engaging in a vast array of criminal enterprises, namely, money laundering.
One of the guys was arrested in New Zealand in his 30mil+ castlemansion. Insane!
Body Triangle - January 24, 2012
Not only that
But he locked himself in a panic room with a shotgun. Pretty crazy stuff.
MemphisMike - January 24, 2012
Shit, I keep forgetting about the money laundering. I guess that example doesn’t really cut it then.
In all fairness to Zuffa though – they have done a better job at transitioning the way they deliver their product to meet technological demands, than a lot of other current industries which also complain about piracy. Zuffa had free FB fights, a way to order and watch events online (even with extra capabilities that TV subscribers can’t use like multiple audio streams), and even watching events from your iPhone. But they make their mistakes as well… SOPA support is not the first. Their crusade to pull down every Youtube video showing any of their footage is ridiculous.
Zachary Kater - January 24, 2012
This one really bothered me. A VERY large part of the reason that I’m such a huge MMA fan right now, is that when I was just getting into this sport, I was able to look up historic fights and see them for myself. I could hear a name like Wanderlei Silva and go see for myself why he’s such a badass. It’s entirely because of this that within a few weeks of my getting into the sport, I could easily converse with long time fans of the sport. I found every big name I could, looked up their records on Wikipedia, and set to work educating myself through their old fights.
Without means of seeing those old fights for free, I would have never become the fan I am today, and I wouldn’t be buying PPVs now.
Even having the option to buy them wouldn’t have worked, as I was a very broke college student at the time. Thankfully those years of sacrifice have paid off and landed me a nice job, so I can afford PPVs now, but had the free option not been there, I would never have gotten hooked.
Shaun32887 - January 24, 2012
Lets be honest
MMA is as popular as it is today because of it’s presence on the internet.
discoandherpes - January 24, 2012
I’ll go to a bar to watch it, or I download it the next day off of my fav torrent site. If you think that is stealing, than so be it. It doesn’t stop me from sleeping at night.
If I lived in the UK, i’d be watching it on TV and not paying $60 for it.
I’ve spent probably 1000s of dollars on PPVs, I’ve been watching MMA since the first UFC. I always buy the PPV, but sometimes you need to make a moral stand.
If anyone thinks this isn’t going to have an effect, thats fine, keep filling their pockets, but i’m done.
Clay Davis - January 24, 2012
BE would be boring as shit
if we weren’t allowed to post pictures and gifs from the internet.
av1o3 - January 24, 2012
Anything based on user made content would most likely end up shutting down.
iiowyn - January 25, 2012
Yeah, and think about the Judo Chop articles.
That would be a bummer.
NickRingp4pGOAT - January 25, 2012
I can stop paying for PPVs and just watch in a bar to protest.
I bought a shitload of PPVs in 2011, and I’m sure a bunch of you have as well. Just go to Buffalo Wild Wings or some other place that doesn’t charge cover instead. They’re already paying the UFC a set amount of money for the PPV whether you go there or not.
Rob Young - January 24, 2012
I agree with you all about SOPA and PIPA, but if you stop buying PPVs it won’t get Zuffa to withdraw their support for the bills, and who cares if they support it? Zuffa’s support of the bills will have NO BEARING on whether or not said bills pass. Basically, I understand the principle but don’t see an effective end-result.
Machiel Van - January 24, 2012
Lol I just restated what Zach said above (didn’t read that first, whoops)
Machiel Van - January 24, 2012
I can't agree there.
If, as the Supreme Court has held, money = speech, then you are implicitly speaking by withholding money from Zuffa. Zuffa’s support of the bill WILL have bearing on whether or not it passes- maybe not a lot, but some. If people tried to withdraw business from all of its supporters, I’m willing to bet they would change their tune. At the very least, it would force their executives to discuss the matter.
Body Triangle - January 24, 2012
Zuffa’s support of SOPA and PIPA is just inherent to their business model; I’d be extremely surprised if they backed down. It would take several abysmal PPV buyrates, and more importantly, they’d have to be able to establish that it was a direct result of people protesting their support of the bills. I just don’t see that happening at all.
Machiel Van - January 24, 2012
When I first learned of SOPA and PIPA, I just expected Zuffa to support them so I didn’t care. It was just a no-brainer.
Machiel Van - January 24, 2012
Right, but that doesn't mean you can't try to influence them.
Just giving up and saying “well, I might as well buy because they won’t even know why I’m not”.
They would be counting on that.
Body Triangle - January 24, 2012
You have to influence them in the only way we can.
And thats with our $$.
That is all Zuffa cares about. Its obvious since the support these bills. The whole internet be damned if it can make Zuffa another buck
Clay Davis - January 24, 2012
this is more than just political BS, boss. you’re thinking small.
Victor Rodriguez - January 24, 2012
SOPA & PIPA...
Sounds like two hippie chicks…
RECE ROCK - January 24, 2012
I thought hippies didn't use SOPA
menckenstein - January 24, 2012
Dirty Lovin'...
RECE ROCK - January 24, 2012
Soaping up Pipa
UncleMax - January 24, 2012
You’re on fire today, that’s like the fifth comment I’ve rec’d
BROCKLESNAR!!!!! - January 24, 2012
"It's not natural, man. Water is from mother earth, it's all she gives me so it's all I need."
Shaun32887 - January 24, 2012
"I'm not in the website biz..."
yeah no shit your web site is mediocre at best.
RECE ROCK - January 24, 2012
only marginally relevant, but I thought it was hilarious
some schmuck in texas - January 24, 2012
that's awesome!
Body Triangle - January 24, 2012
Who gives a shit? How about the fans who have shared their credit card information to buy merchandise or to buy online PPV’s? Even for Dana, what an absolutely embarrassing response. Fowlkes hit the nail on the head.
andrew861 - January 24, 2012
you mean everyones credit card isnt maxed out?!?
gspmademegay - January 24, 2012
Who gives a shit?
As someone who became a Fight Club member to get “exclusive” access to pre-sale tickets last Oct. (only to have the card changed hours after purchase, the promise of a refund that never came, and being out $80 to get seats likely worse than I would have gotten at the general public Ticketmaster sale) I give a shit. Having my credit card info stolen or having to go back and change my password on every site I’ve used my credit card on in the last year would just be the icing on the cake of the miserable experience that is UFC Fight Club.
And I don’t know that much about hacking, but I’m pretty sure DNS attacks and a full-on infiltration of your server’s security are two completely different things.
medium seen - January 24, 2012
I'm a huge Dana White
supporter and fan. At this point it may be time to set up a delay on his twitter account. Allow a little time to pass after he types an angry, personal lash out before it actually goes live. Let him cool down, think it through and then hopefully go back in and tone it down. His personality has led the UFC through an impossible terrain over the years and no one can deny his passion is second to none. Moving into the mainstream he is going to have to become a little more diplomatic in his public forums or it is going to become a hinderance to the company he loves so much. Dana has a great team around him, it’s time to do more delegating and less traveling. The man is going to run himself into the grave if he’s not careful. Take some time to enjoy the fortune you’ve made, rest, and allow the machine to run.
CRWHITLOCK - January 24, 2012
Agreed.
And a rec for you.
Body Triangle - January 24, 2012
I'm not a DW fan
But I agree with you. It would be good to him.
Triangled - January 24, 2012
Strike 2 for Dana.
Strike 1 was the Fox debut debacle throwing Cain under the bus like that was so unprofessional and on your network tv debut none the less. Now this his angry tirade of tweets to fans and personal insults. Can’t wait to see what strike 3 will be.
nickrodamous - January 24, 2012
pictures in women's lingerie?
Earl Montclair - January 24, 2012
Provocative pictures.
With his bald head dipped in oil George Costanza style. For real strike 3 probably did happen ages ago but this is post fox deal. Kinda like how it took forever for them to give fastest KO to ludwig Zuffa likes to re-write history.
nickrodamous - January 24, 2012
I’m pretty sure strike 3 happened ages ago.
andrew861 - January 24, 2012
This is actually a very good point.
Think about how much better Dana would be at his job is he was NOT ALLOWED to voice anything within 5 minutes of it coming to mind.
Twitter delay would be easy; one of his aides could write a program that would store all of his comments, and then 5-10 minutes later, he’d have to re-read the comment and click “Approve to post.”
My god, it’s brilliant.
I need to tell Lorenzo.
Shaun32887 - January 24, 2012
Dana needs to hire that little creep with the mohawk that was always following Brock around with a briefcase.
Then we can finally know what the hell he does. Brock probably doesn’t need him anymore.
NickRingp4pGOAT - January 25, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Bloody Elbow to post a comment.