Michael Cohen - Getty Images
Photo by Michael Cohen/Getty Images
There's no denying that Dana White's confidence (cockiness?) has played a big role in the UFC's explosion, and given that we're seeing the UFC's second effort on Fox tonight it's impossible to say that he hasn't been a part of great things for the sport. But his attitude over this past week has been inexcusably irresponsible and dangerous for the UFC brand and customers who have given the UFC website any personal information.
When the UFC's support of SOPA led to a website redirect that took people to a picture of an anime version of Hitler, White took to Twitter to repeatedly tell people that he did not care about the attack and said "I'm in the fight biz not the website biz. Who gives a ****?"
Many quickly took the UFC president to task, explaining that the website is more than an advertising tool it is a site to which customers provide their name, address, phone number and credit card information. To treat any attack on the website as an insignificant moment is not what the very vocal face of the company needed to do.
To make matters worse, after the company issued a proper statement explaining that there was no evidence that confidential information was compromised, Dana went to Ariel Helwani and openly invited more attacks when he said "I'm not afraid of you, you don't f*****g scare me, you come in and do your thing, you don't scare me."
From a business standpoint, to invite attacks to a group which loves to be challenged, is incredibly dangerous. There is a time to just shut up. That means not insulting, provoking or joking about a group that presents a risk to your customers. Yet, as recently as last night (Friday) Dana was continuing to call the group involved "terrorists" despite that label being what set off the second round of attacks.
It is the job of a corporation to instill a sense of security and prove to customers that they can trust to do business with them. When Dana is openly inviting attacks he is sending a message, intentional or not, that macho posturing and "not being beaten by nerds" is more important than customer data security.
So far the attacks have been limited to Dana's personal information and some minor attacks on the UFC site (as well as the data of Jason Miller being released) but insulting the attackers and daring them to continue is begging for someone to take it to the next level and attempt to access customer data as in the Sony attacks or what happened with Zappos.
What Dana and the UFC's focus in these situations should be is to focus on making sure that customers feel completely confident in doing business with them, not in trying to win a war of words in what is ultimately a losing game.
While no one is denying Dana's role in building the UFC to the force that it is now, but this was a disappointing moment where he didn't know when to turn off the personality that works so well in fight promotion.
White would do well to keep the words of Zappos CEO Tony Hsieh in mind and how seriously they treated the effect that an attack can have on your brand. "We've spent over 12 years building our reputation, brand and trust with our customers...It's painful to see us take so many steps back due to a single incident."
The UFC didn't have to take much of a step back with the initial attack, but the chosen response by White has already started a chain of customer confidence issues with recommendations floating around the internet that fans not order UFC 143 or any merchandise from the website.
While it may not be time for Dana the fight promoter to grow up, it's certainly time for Dana the businessman to up his game.
2 recs | 81 comments
Dana White just needs to shut his mouth.
For once.
Jonathan. - January 28, 2012
Nah…not this time.
The article is probably correct from a pure business-standpoint. But anonymous are internet-bullies. Dana stepping up and saying fuck you to these self-entitled twerps is just the right thing to do. They want to blackmail him into supporting their agenda. However righteous their goals may be, that is just wrong and for once I like his boneheaded response even though yes, my CC data is stored on UFC-servers. The fact that we should worry about our credit cards because of the so called “hacktivists” actually shows quite clearly that they are not the “Good guys”. Plus: Credit Card companies shield you pretty well from this kind of thing. My data was stolen during the Sony hack and before that in another incidents, nothing ever happened.
KGNLuc - January 29, 2012
I worked in IT doing incident response to situations like this for YEARS. So I have familiarity with how attacks need to be handled both in front of and behind the scenes. So…just to be clear that I’m not just making shit up
Brent Brookhouse - January 28, 2012
You don't need an IT background to know how Anonymous acts
Rob Young - January 28, 2012 via mobile
Or to know that White handled this like a fool.
It was embarrassing. And, frankly, pretty disgraceful to sit there and call them on when people invest money into the UFC on that web site. He put finances at risk just to act like a tough jerk.
Jonathan. - January 28, 2012
I appreciate the piece, thanks for writing it.
I’m somewhat amazed that this whole thing is actually backfiring on Dana. I was SO expecting the community to side with Dana ‘HURR TERRORISM’ White on this.
pornflake - January 28, 2012 via mobile
Fox vegas is reporting the release of Dana's info was a hoax
Link
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2012/1/28/2754131/hackers-trying-to-post-dana-whites-info-online-post-the-wrong-persons#comments
higgledy-piggledy - January 28, 2012
UPDATE --- also read this... message from UGNazi.
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2012/1/28/2754131/hackers-trying-to-post-dana-whites-info-online-post-the-wrong-persons#90097612
higgledy-piggledy - January 28, 2012
Dana is just fucking stupid at this point.
Why does MMA attract such douchey fans? Look at the biggest celebrity to come from the sport! It’s imitation of the master!
Scott C. Broussard - January 28, 2012
Perfect example of when keeping it real goes wrong.
pud333 - January 28, 2012
same guys who
stream ppvs bitch about fighter pay
that shit is funny and true
P86 - January 28, 2012
Which has nothing to do with the website hacks.
pdl - January 28, 2012
Strawman.
SSreporters - January 28, 2012
As Anonymous likes to say
Dana has just humped a hornet’s nest
Rob Young - January 28, 2012 via mobile
The Fertittas have also had their personal info released.
Dana needs to shut up. This isn’t a fight he can win & he clearly doesn’t know much about Anonymous.
YPG - January 28, 2012
Dana went to Ariel Helwani and openly invited more attacks when he said "I'm not afraid of you, you don't f*****g scare me, you come in and do your thing, you don't scare me."
The Lethal Haze - January 28, 2012
Because of this whole fiasco, illegal streams have become a higher quality product than paying on ufc.tv or the xbox app.
pdl - January 28, 2012
Huh?
Why?
gzl5000 - January 28, 2012
If anon decides to hack during a ppv broadcast, the illegal streams are more reliable to stay up
IRodC - January 28, 2012
Let me explain this a little better...
I’ve never purchased music from the itunes store because the attached DRM restricted how and when I could use the product (music) that I had received from them. Purchasing a physical disc and ripping the music generally led to a better product, free of DRM. Torrenting an album ripped at 320kpbs and DRM free that also had the bonus tracks from the European and Japanese region releases was even better, since it was more content that I could use in more ways. Same thing goes with movies. Why would I buy a DVD that I can play in devices with an optical drive when I could download a .avi file that will play on my TV, computer, phone, etc.? Legal avenues to content were an inferior product. So, with that out of the way…
The UFC streams should boast one major benefit over pirated streams: reliability and security. Recently there have been tons of issues with online streams being behind the live broadcast and cutting out or dying. That’s just the service itself. Now there’s also a serious risk of an attack on ufc.tv during an event, which I highly doubt they are prepared to prevent. Suddenly the users don’t have their content, while somebody watching a stream provided by some guy with a slingbox on his TV is still active since it is coming from a cable provider.
As for security, who knows how long it is before ufc.com / ufc.tv / ufcstore.com data is compromised? Illegal streams don’t take or process or store your credit card information. It’s less safe.
Therefore, illegal streams have arguably become a superior product to a paid stream through the UFC. And the price point is so much better.
pdl - January 28, 2012
Ahhh.
That makes a lot of sense. Thanks.
gzl5000 - January 28, 2012
True. Today I bought a CD, 2011 release, and I can’t play that shit on my laptop. I didn’t have time to look up why it doesn’t play, but it’s disgusting, since it was pretty expensive.
dancingChicken - January 28, 2012
word
you kill piracy by making your product accessible and fair price. hell finding a good stream can be a little hard sometime
MaZZacare - January 28, 2012
curious
Do they give you your money back if a stream you pay for is crap quality?
jim-ma - January 28, 2012
iTunes got rid of DRM on music years ago.
ThisOneGoesToEleven - January 31, 2012
Dana White is going to do something that will damage the UFC as a brand
So badly. He needs to control himself.
Anonymous can hack the UFC for as long as they want because Dana is the only guy who will do stupid shit like dare hackers to takedown UFC.com
SSreporters - January 28, 2012
Can you link your post on the details of the intrusion?
In a fanshot, there was a user claiming that the second hack was a simple XSS intrusion/redirect. That wasn’t the sense I got from what I read. IIRC they got files from UFC.tv that they posted online.
Sabate - January 28, 2012
The 2nd hack was an XSS intrustion I think
It’s in the other article Brent wrote. Tons of vulnerabilities they exploited.
SSreporters - January 28, 2012
They were very nice to only do a few minor image injections.
Brent Brookhouse - January 28, 2012
And safe ones, too
An old sports wiki I used to write for got overrun by 4chan people and my articles got vandalized to shreds. Ugly images of an erect Adolf Hitler, animal pr0n, etc.
Took forever to clean everything up as me and one other person were the only admins available out of 7.
SSreporters - January 28, 2012
Dana never should have said shit like he did
but it’s a good thing these hackers aren’t nearly as good as everyone thinks. Half the info they put out was wrong.
Geno Mrosko - January 28, 2012
wrong?
Ricardo Arguello - January 28, 2012
I don’t think a lot of the phone numbers were correct/up-to-date.
wonderfulspam - January 28, 2012
Allegedly wrong.
Supposedly they doxed some lady whose dog was named Dana. But the reporting was iffy so take it with a grain of salt.
Sabate - January 28, 2012
Some of the numbers were reportedly wrong and out-of-date
but JoshTheGod even admitted some of the shit they just completely made up.
SSreporters - January 28, 2012
"some of the shit they just completely made up."
Great hacking, guys.
Ricardo Arguello - January 28, 2012
As in...they intentionally made it up.
But this latest one with the Fertitta brothers seems to be legit, particularly the IP address.
SSreporters - January 28, 2012
It's not that simple.
There are definitely a handful of idiots who are swarming because the UFC is the target de jour. Most of “Anonymous” are script kiddies. But there are definitely people who align themselves with the movement who are capable of doing much worse things including gathering customer data. Depending on where the UFC’s email is hosted, that info is anywhere between easily and REALLY easily accessible to anybody with skills who cared enough.
pdl - January 28, 2012
So the illegal activity is fine...
but using immature arrogance and brio to respond to an illegal act deserves more criticism than said illegal act? It’s up to the potential victims of hacking to walk on egg shells so as not to invite retaliation? I agree that White’s response was a poor way of handling it, but the dudes who broke the law to settle a childish twitter dispute are infinitely more in the wrong here… like, deserving of an Open Letter wrong. But, I guess that you wouldn’t want to provoke those guys, huh?
Serious question: when generating this piece, did you ever have the thought that you’d better not criticize the hackers for fear of inviting reprisal on BE or SB?
John Danaher's Hair - January 28, 2012
I don’t think this has very much to do with right and wrong. You can defend or attack the hackers’ actions as much as you like but whether you support them or not doesn’t make an iota of difference when it comes to evaluating Dana White’s response.
wonderfulspam - January 28, 2012
not the point at
dana doesn’t have to walk on eggshells, just not openly provoke people who threaten his livelihood and invite them to do just that
the morality or legality of the hackers’ actions isnt this BEs focus in reporting this and isnt even mentioned
Cunny - January 28, 2012
exactly. but when referring to a provocation as dangerous and irresponsible, I don’t see how the most dangerous and irresponsible actions involved in this story aren’t having an editorial eye turned upon them. If UFC customer info is stolen it’ll be the responsibility of the hackers who will deserve all the criticism.
John Danaher's Hair - January 28, 2012
They’ll deserve the criticism for doing it, but I think Dana would hold a LOT of blame for having provoked them into doing it. Sorry, that’s the reality of business. You don’t provoke people to do bad things to your company and customers.
Brent Brookhouse - January 28, 2012
what would have been best practice for an executive in his shoes?
John Danaher's Hair - January 28, 2012
Maybe to just shut the fuck up?
And maybe back off his fierce stance on SOPA?
SSreporters - January 28, 2012
why – if thats what the man believes in he should hold to his stance, you don’t change your opinion on a issue you believe in over a attack on your website.
Shocbomb - January 28, 2012
You don't just personally call out guys with infinitely more capable technological skills
To take down your company’s website and media service.
He is treating this like he treats every other case dealing with him – Through shouting matches. For once he’s getting serious backlash and damage to his company.
SSreporters - January 28, 2012
I would do the same exact thing. It would piss me off and I would hold onto the stance/opinion I believe in.
Shocbomb - January 28, 2012
what is he sapose to do admit defeat becasue some kid hijacked his URL
Shocbomb - January 28, 2012
You would dare people who are known for hacking sites with consummate ease?
Other people are SOPA supporters, like the NFL, CBS, NBC, etc. His issue is he made it even more vocal and personally attacked Anonymous and the like by calling them terrorists.
SSreporters - January 28, 2012
like I said if they could of done worse they would of done it, If I had the million like Zuffa I would buy a few computer hacker geeks of my own to track down annon like Tsutomu Shimomura did to Mitnick, just like in fighting there is always someone better then you out there and the same hold’s true with black hat hackers
Shocbomb - January 28, 2012
Honestly, just leaving it at “as of right now it appears that customer data is safe, we’re working with authorities to try to track down the culprit and are doing everything in our power to make sure that your data remains secure.”
Basically..what the press release said.
I know it’s not in Dana’s nature. But shutting up really is the best stance.
Brent Brookhouse - January 28, 2012
the point i was getting at was that it's generally beyond BE's scope
BE’s focus would be the effect of the hacking on mma, not the morality of the hacking in general
Cunny - January 28, 2012
Imagine I have a gun pointed at my head, and all I do is egg the guy on “DO IT! I BET YOU WON’T SHOOT ME! YOU’RE TOO SCARED!” And then he shoots me.
Is he to blame for commiting murder? Yea, but it was still pretty dumb on my part to encourage him.
Hypnotic - January 28, 2012
the degree of comparison is just alittle different ? NO
Shocbomb - January 28, 2012
Should Barack Obama's stance in a debate be
“I’m so good at national security that I BET NONE OF YOU DUMB TERRORISTS CAN KILL ANY AMERICANS! GO AHEAD AND TRY!” Then if somebody is attacked as a reaction to that statement, he could reply “I’m in the President business, not the funeral home business.”
pdl - January 28, 2012
Upon re-reading my comment here, this needs to become a movie.
It could be an 85 minute setup for that one liner. Buakaw will play the vice president and we can figure the rest later because it’s already so awesome.
pdl - January 28, 2012
At one point
The Senate and Congress will say “Barack, you’re risking too many innocents with your crazy antics and disregard for policy. Give me your gun and badge.”
Then Barack goes out and karate chops a bunch of crooks anyway.
Farthammer - January 28, 2012
wicked point
jim-ma - January 28, 2012
I never once said the hackers were in the right. Ever.
But do I really need to write an op/ed stating that hacking is wrong?
What is interesting here is Dana’s response and (again, as someone who dealt with attacks professionally for years) how horrible it is.
Brent Brookhouse - January 28, 2012
BOTH sides are
acting childish. Both sides need to be educated. If someone could sit down and explain the freedoms that acts like SOPA take away, to Dana, and really attempt to help him understand, instead of just attack him and his company, I’m sure things might be a little different.
aeonplague - January 28, 2012
Dana White has a high school education
Does anyone seriously expect him to understand anything else that doesn’t have to do with his bottom line? Does anyone expect him to even acknowledge what the bill does beyond his own interests? Doubt it.
SSreporters - January 28, 2012
Yes
but it has to be explained in the correct way. A lot of people have only a highschool education, I fail to see what your point is.
aeonplague - January 28, 2012
My point is he's never been one to delve deep into issues as serious as SOPA
He just sees “They can shut down sites that stream my cards? I’m in.” and then leaves it there. I don’t think he would even want to learn.
SSreporters - January 28, 2012
The line he keeps repeating of “no bill is perfect” is a good reflection of that.
Because, sure…that’s true. But saying “all are flawed” does not mean that all are EQUALLY flawed.
Brent Brookhouse - January 28, 2012
It really just needs to be made about him. How will it effect his legit customers, how it effects people finding out about MMA, how much MORE work it will be for him to spread the word. I don’t know, maybe he used to trade mixed tapes with friends to find out about new music.
All I’m saying is, it can be done, and releasing someone’s personal private information to the public because they don’t align their views with you is wrong.
aeonplague - January 28, 2012
The only way that this makes any sense is if Dana has offered the UFC website up as bait for some kind of FBI sting against the hackers. With one of the biggest shows of the year coming up next weekend, I won’t be buying it through UFCTV like I have some of them in the past.
dpk875 - January 28, 2012
You
dont invite someone in youre house who can fuck you up you just dont not a smart move
LoBoTrOn - January 28, 2012
It was all good just a week ago...
RECE ROCK - January 28, 2012 via mobile
The problem with Dana White is he is in a permanent dick-waving mentality
Which is probably why he loves Joe Rogan so much because he has moments where he acts like that, too. The only difference is Rogan is a comic and a host of a show that features contestants drinking donkey jizz, he’s not President of the premier combat sports organization in the world.
Could you imagine Roger Goodell saying shit like “I dare these loser hackers to hack NFL.com. These assholes are just like terrorists and if they can hack us again I’ll fine James Harrison $75,000.” ? No, as much as I can’t stand him, there is a time to act diplomatically and that is not up Dana White’s corner. He is too much into the bravado that he actively hurts his own image in addition to the UFC, which through collateral damage means MMA as a sport.
SSreporters - January 28, 2012
I like BB's point
That Dana isn’t like the guys who run other sports companies though. But yeah, maybe when it comes to things like this, it’s best not to be a funny and outrageous fight fan and more a discerning businessman. He can save the swearing and general disrespect for dealing with other promoters and Fedor.
jim-ma - January 28, 2012
I'm sure the advertisers are glad dw doesn't need his website and it doesn't effect his business...
That should make them want to do more marketing with the UFC website
Fuck it!
RECE ROCK - January 28, 2012 via mobile
binladened
Dont forget Dana said that the hackers would get assassinated also…. wow.. he really wants the ufc to end.
Jason Robillard - January 28, 2012
He's no different than global politicians, usually Americans, calling WikiLeaks people and Assange "cyber-terrorists" who threaten American lives
As if the dirty shit that got leaked didn’t affect American lives at all.
When you feel threatened or backed into a corner like these people and White, the name-calling ensues.
SSreporters - January 28, 2012
agree w/ article
Dana needs to watch “American Greed: Get Rich or Die Tryin’” to see how much damage these type of folks can do. These anonymous folks are probably even more impressive than the guys on the show, so if they want to do you harm — they def could. I don’t think it’d be any different than a bank daring people to break into their vaults. You are going to bring all attention down to your vault, when they initially had thousands of other victims.
I would be extremely surprised if Dana isn’t get his hand slapped over and over again behind the scenes. If I were to do something this stupid for my company, I’d be fired instantly and it would be deserved.
themango69 - January 28, 2012
relax there domain/url got hijacked for a few hours. If you read what most people who now a thing or two about hackers said on here, the attacker anon is at best a low to mid level hacker and if he could do any real damage would have, like a bot/virus in there systems/steal cusotmers credit card info,etc
Shocbomb - January 28, 2012
This is an incredibly dumb thing to say.
Damon O. - January 28, 2012
ok
Shocbomb - January 28, 2012
I agree that Dana White’s response was stupid. However the hacker’s attack and subsequent retaliation is giving the UFC perfect ammunition to take to government officials and lay out why bills like SOPA should be passed. These hacker’s keep attacking big corporations and bills like SOPA won’t be going far enough in the eyes of politicians.
Which is bad for the average internet user because any of those laws passed won’t deter the hackers from doing what they are doing but it will change the internet for everyone else. Basically hurting almost all internet users except the ones the laws were created to stop.
mattman73 - January 28, 2012
Both sides are wrong and acting stupid
hacking while a way to show your security sucks and not that safe. As a way to show your moral position on subject x not so much you kinda just look like a dick.
but daring the people who already hacked you to do it again because your Dana F’in White and im in the fight buisness tough guy.just makes one wonder how the hell he helped make zuffa into what it is.
MaZZacare - January 28, 2012
i hope dana white never changes
his passion built this company, and if you want to say it will also destroy his company so be it.
I enjoy the ride.
At least you know how he really feels haha
AnotherBadPrediction - January 28, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Bloody Elbow to post a comment.