Hold the phone! Bell is suing Blizzard over the Authenticators for their games, seeking damages for “consumer fraud, unjust enrichment, negligence, breach of contract and bailment,”
The plaintiff, Benjamin Bell is claiming that Blizzard is “deceptively and unfairly” charging some users to secure data from hackers. He specifically refers to Blizzard’s $6.50 keychain authenticators. I’m just going out on a limb here, but it sounds like a frivolous lawsuit to me, since players can download the mobile authenticators for free and no one is forced to pay any money to take extra and optional precaution when it comes to the security of their accounts.
The suit furthermore accuses Blizzard of unfairly requiring users to use Battle.net and states that Blizzard has continued to “negligently, deliberately, and/or recklessly fail to ensure that adequate, reasonable procedures safeguard the private information stored on this website.”Bellpoints out the multiple hacking incidents including May’s Diablo III hacks as evidence that Blizzard failed to take the necessary legally required steps to alert players.
After reaching out to Blizzard, a spokesman responded to IGN with a statement.
“This suit is without merit and filled with patently false information, and we will vigorously defend ourselves through the appropriate legal channels.
We want to reiterate that we take the security of our players’ data very seriously, and we’re fully committed to defending our network infrastructure. We also recognize that the cyber-threat landscape is always evolving, and we’re constantly working to track the latest developments and make improvements to our defenses.
The suit’s claim that we didn’t properly notify players regarding the August 2012 security breach is not true. Not only did Blizzard act quickly to provide information to the public about the situation, we explained the actions we were taking and let players know how the incident affected them, including the fact that no names, credit card numbers, or other sensitive financial information was disclosed. You can read our letter to players and a comprehensive FAQ related to the situation on our website.
The suit also claims that the Battle.net Authenticator is required in order to maintain a minimal level of security on the player’s Battle.net account information that’s stored on Blizzard’s network systems. This claim is also completely untrue and apparently based on a misunderstanding of the Authenticator’s purpose. The Battle.net Authenticator is an optional tool that players can use to further protect their Battle.net accounts in the event that their login credentials are compromised outside of Blizzard’s network infrastructure. Available as a physical device or as a free app for iOS or Android devices, it offers players an added level of security against account-theft attempts that stem from sources such as phishing attacks, viruses packaged with seemingly harmless file downloads, and websites embedded with malicious code.
When a player attaches an Authenticator to his or her account, it means that logging in to Battle.net will require the use of a random code generated by the Authenticator in addition to the player’s login credentials. This helps our systems identify when it’s actually the player who is logging in and not someone who might have stolen the player’s credentials by means of one of the external theft measures mentioned above, or as a result of the player using the same account name and password on another website or service that was compromised. Considering that players are ultimately responsible for securing their own computers, and that the extra step required by the Authenticator is an added inconvenience during the log in process, we ultimately leave it up to the players to decide whether they want to add an Authenticator to their account. However, we always strongly encourage it, and we try to make it as easy as possible to do.
Many players have voiced strong approval for our security-related efforts. Blizzard deeply appreciates the outpouring of support it has received from its players related to the frivolous claims in this particular suit.”
Last Updated: November 12, 2012