conversation: User (BurnedOut_ITGuy): "Just thinking about the post yesterday with the guy who's house burned down and he lost everything.  I do hope he got everything sorted out with the Red Cross but it got me to thinking about dealing with emergencies from a financial perspective. \n\nObviously an emergency fund is a must.  I feel like that's the one thing everyone on PF can agree on.  Should we have a plan beyond that?  Like where we're going to spend the night in an utter disaster or what financial contingencies should be immediately activated?  Or what items we would need to immediately purchase and how we will purchase them?  Or am I overthinking this entirely? "
  Self: "I use LastPass to hold all my credentials, license keys, and emergency contact information.  It's accessible from any computer with an internet connection, as well as my phone. I have scans of most important documents zipped (with a password) and uploaded to Dropbox. "
  User (BurnedOut_ITGuy): "I like the idea of scanning important documents and putting them on Dropbox.  I need to do that. "
  ScrewedThePooch (ScrewedThePooch): "&gt; I like the idea of scanning important documents and putting them on Dropbox. I need to do that. \n\n[You might want to reconsider](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/09/07/hacked-dropbox-data-of-68-million-users-is-now-or-sale-on-the-dark-web/)\n"
  User (BurnedOut_ITGuy): "OP said the documents were password protected.  I'm still ok with it.  "
  ScrewedThePooch (ScrewedThePooch): "I would not entrust any of my data in a service like that if it's been hacked, even if certain things were password protected. "
  User (BurnedOut_ITGuy): "Who do you trust?  Every cloud service has been hacked from Google to Amazon. "
  ScrewedThePooch (ScrewedThePooch): "When were Google and Amazon cloud services hacked? Phishing and social engineering don't count, because those are user error. I'm talking about genuine hacks and data dumps."
  User (BurnedOut_ITGuy): "Phishing and social engineering totally count.  If you discount them then there are a lot of cloud services that have never been hacked.  Someone simply social engineered an employee into giving them access to millions of accounts. "
  ScrewedThePooch (ScrewedThePooch): "&gt; Someone simply social engineered an employee into giving them access to millions of accounts. \n\nThis is different. I am talking about some idiot giving out their password and thus "getting hacked." *That* doesn't count. Tricking an employee into giving access to all accounts is different.\n\nAnyway, please show me evidence of Google and Amazon's cloud services being hacked, because I'm unaware of this ever happening."
  User (BurnedOut_ITGuy): "Well, if you're not going to count that then most companies never get hacked.  When you read a story somewhere about a "hack" it almost always has a social engineering element to it.  So no one at all is getting hacked according to you.\n\nAmazon was hacked just a few months ago - https://www.hackread.com/amazon-suffers-security-breach/.\n\nGoogle was hacked earlier this year - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3573203/Big-data-breaches-major-email-services-expert.html\n\nEven more Google accounts were hacked later - https://www.cnet.com/how-to/how-to-find-out-if-your-google-account-has-been-hacked/\n\nThe latter doesn't fit your criteria of hacking though as users were conned into installing malware on their phones.  Since social engineering doesn't count, this isn't a hack according to you even though 13k accounts were compromised. "
  ScrewedThePooch (ScrewedThePooch): "Yeah, the Amazon one is retarded on Amazon's part.\n\nThe first "Google hack" is not a comprehensive leak of all Google accounts and includes various email accounts like Yahoo accounts as well as mostly mail.ru accounts. Leads me to believe it is a breach of some other database which contained email addresses and passwords. Likely the passwords in the leak are the same as the passwords for the email accounts (really stupid on the user's part), and that is how the account credentials were discovered.\n\nThe second Google hack was via people being dumb and installing shady third-party app stores and malware. Any account with any provider can be hacked if people install malware on their devices. The service provider cannot be blamed for this.\n\nI am looking for a widespread leak of a huge amount of accounts which requires no action on behalf of the individual user. I am talking about actual servers being compromised and all account data being leaked: like what happened to LinkedIn and Yahoo. Google cannot be blamed for idiots installing malware on their devices.\n\nAmazon can definitely be blamed for their idiocy (though I suspect the focus on engineering quality for the Kindle is lower than the focus on Amazon.com and AWS). Thank you for exposing that. I will not be buying a Kindle, Echo, or any other Amazon object that requires authentication."
  User (BurnedOut_ITGuy): "So, social engineering people isn't a hack and a hack that only compromises some accounts but not all accounts is not a hack either.  A hack is only a hack if it exploits some hole in code and exposes all the data on the other side not just some of it. Got it. "
  ScrewedThePooch (ScrewedThePooch): "A hack where the provider is to be blamed due to shitty design. You can't honestly tell me that just because some idiots installed malware on their machines that keylogged all their email and banking passwords that now it is legit to go around telling everyone that 'Google got hacked' and 'Bank of America got hacked' and 'Wells Fargo got hacked.' I'm specifically talking about not using a service due to the untrustworthiness or negligence of the service provider. "
  User (BurnedOut_ITGuy): "Those are absolutely hacks.  If you hired a hacker to get you some Bank of America accounts the very first thing they're going to do is social engineering stuff.  According to you, if they can call up BoA and somehow get access to a bunch of accounts that's not a hack and they shouldn't be paid?   There's more to designing a system than just the code. "
  ScrewedThePooch (ScrewedThePooch): "You're talking about penetration testing which falls under "the provider is to be blamed due to shitty design." If penetration testing yields positive results for hackers/etc, then this erodes confidence in the provider's security. This would make me question the integrity of the provider's system.\n\nI am talking about people who had their accounts "hacked" because the individuals were dumb and installed malware on their own machines or gave their password to some scammer on the phone. **That** is not poor design on the provider's behalf and would not make me question the integrity of the provider's system. This was the example you gave for the "Google hack."\n\nIf the second scenario happened to a few peoples' banking and Google accounts, I would not blame the banks and Google. I would blame the user."
  