Incidentally, we try not to use these sorts of “Forbes contributor” articles on Wikipedia when possible. They’re effectively just blogs masquerading under the credibility of Forbes staff’s actual journalism.
That said, I don’t see anything wrong with this except. This is legitimate attack vector.
I was lured into reading a suspicious Forbes article.
Incidentally, we try not to use these sorts of “Forbes contributor” articles on Wikipedia when possible. They’re effectively just blogs masquerading under the credibility of Forbes staff’s actual journalism.
That said, I don’t see anything wrong with this except. This is legitimate attack vector.
Tying it to big name providers like they have a security hole in the title is clickbait at absolute best.
It’s always being an attack vector. Phishing scams have been the oldest form of fraud from the beginning.
It’s basically the same principle that con artists have been using for decades long before the invention of the internet