[smoyer]

"After disclosing two distinct hacks late last year, one of which implicated a billion users, Yahoo ..."

This is a weird place to use implicated as it makes the reader think those billion users are to blame for the hack. If that's true, it's a human-scale DDOS - no IoT devices needed.

[miles]

This sort of victim blaming is all too common in the mainstream press:

IRS Says More Taxpayers May Have Been Hacked http://time.com/4000659/irs-taxpayer-hacked-cybercrime/

It wasn't the taxpayers that were hacked - it was the IRS.

Hackers stole personal information from 104,000 taxpayers, IRS says https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/federal-eye/wp/2015/05/2...

Hackers did not steal personal information from 104,000 taxpayers - they stole it from the IRS.

Smaller media outlets often get it right:

Over 700,000 People Got Screwed in Last Year's IRS Data Breach http://gizmodo.com/over-700-000-people-got-screwed-in-last-y...

[mmaunder]

Grammatical error, along with many others in the article. Nothing sinister about it.

[WillPostForFood]

Implicate has a negative connotation in common usage, and for that reason probably isn't the best choice, but it really just means "entwine." In that more traditional sense, the wording makes sense, it is saying they were caught up in the hack.

[quirkafleeg]

Maybe the writer was going for "impacted" and either typed it on their phone or they need to go back to school. Affected would of course be a better word.