Accessing Publicly Available Information on the Internet Is Not a Crime
1–10 of 299 posts
Re: Accessing Publicly Available Information on the Internet Is Not a Crime
#2A Microsoft company attempting to exploit the law for profit? Imagine my shock.
Re: Accessing Publicly Available Information on the Internet Is Not a Crime
#3> LinkedIn argues that imposing criminal liability for automated access of publicly available LinkedIn data would protect the privacy interests of LinkedIn users who decide to publish their information publicly, but that’s just not true
Protect them from what, your unlocked front door? [0][1]
[0] "Hackers selling 117 million LinkedIn passwords" http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/19/technology/linkedin-hack/ind...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_LinkedIn_hack
I'd also note that these companies are barely (if ever) held liable for life-compromising hacks on their platforms.
Re: Accessing Publicly Available Information on the Internet Is Not a Crime
#4> LinkedIn argues that imposing criminal liability for automated access of publicly available LinkedIn data would protect the privacy interests of LinkedIn users who decide to publish their information publicly, but that’s just not true Protect them from what, your unlocked front door ? [0][1] [0] "Hackers selling 117 million LinkedIn passwords" http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/19/technology/linkedin-hack/ind... [1] http…
Regarding your last sentence. In Europe that may change with GDPR.
Re: Accessing Publicly Available Information on the Internet Is Not a Crime
#5> LinkedIn argues that imposing criminal liability for automated access of publicly available LinkedIn data would protect the privacy interests of LinkedIn users who decide to publish their information publicly, but that’s just not true Protect them from what, your unlocked front door ? [0][1] [0] "Hackers selling 117 million LinkedIn passwords" http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/19/technology/linkedin-hack/ind... [1] http…
> I'd also note that these companies are barely (if ever) held liable for life-compromising hacks on their platforms.
You do know it is impossible to stop all cyber attacks? Its always a matter of when, not if. Zero day attacks are developed everyday with not even the best funded cyber security systems able to thwart them. The geniuses are on the offensive side, if they want in, they will get in.
Re: Accessing Publicly Available Information on the Internet Is Not a Crime
#6> LinkedIn argues that imposing criminal liability for automated access of publicly available LinkedIn data would protect the privacy interests of LinkedIn users who decide to publish their information publicly, but that’s just not true Protect them from what, your unlocked front door ? [0][1] [0] "Hackers selling 117 million LinkedIn passwords" http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/19/technology/linkedin-hack/ind... [1] http…
> I'd also note that these companies are barely (if ever) held liable for life-compromising hacks on their platforms. You do know it is impossible to stop all cyber attacks? Its always a matter of when, not if. Zero day attacks are developed everyday with not even the best funded cyber security systems able to thwart them. The geniuses are on the offensive side, if they want in, they will get in.
You didn't really address the point you quoted.
The problem isn't that someone is getting IN; it's that the company throws up their hands and says "tough sht."
Or in a worse case, when Equifax puts up a compromised site to find if you were hacked that requires a significant amount of your SSN and personal details.
(edit: format)
Re: Accessing Publicly Available Information on the Internet Is Not a Crime
#7Are they arguing that it's a crime, or that it's a tort?
Re: Accessing Publicly Available Information on the Internet Is Not a Crime
#8> LinkedIn argues that imposing criminal liability for automated access of publicly available LinkedIn data would protect the privacy interests of LinkedIn users who decide to publish their information publicly, but that’s just not true Protect them from what, your unlocked front door ? [0][1] [0] "Hackers selling 117 million LinkedIn passwords" http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/19/technology/linkedin-hack/ind... [1] http…
> I'd also note that these companies are barely (if ever) held liable for life-compromising hacks on their platforms. You do know it is impossible to stop all cyber attacks? Its always a matter of when, not if. Zero day attacks are developed everyday with not even the best funded cyber security systems able to thwart them. The geniuses are on the offensive side, if they want in, they will get in.
While I agree, as a CTO I would be terrified if a data breach could hold me personally liable. It'd be like a Director of Security at a bank being liable for their bank being robbed with a tank.
But at the same time there is a line. I would be for holding companies liable if, for instance, the data gets out there and you find it is entirely unencrypted and the passwords are MD5 hashed or plain text. There has to be a baseline.
Mistakes should not be punished as long as there is not also negligence.
Re: Accessing Publicly Available Information on the Internet Is Not a Crime
#9>good bots
You mean, bots that obey robots.txt?
https://www.linkedin.com/robots.txt very specifically prohibits scraping by any bot besides a small whitelist.
robots.txt compliance is not difficult to build. I'm fine with robots.txt violations being considered hacking.
Re: Accessing Publicly Available Information on the Internet Is Not a Crime
#10> LinkedIn argues that imposing criminal liability for automated access of publicly available LinkedIn data would protect the privacy interests of LinkedIn users who decide to publish their information publicly, but that’s just not true Protect them from what, your unlocked front door ? [0][1] [0] "Hackers selling 117 million LinkedIn passwords" http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/19/technology/linkedin-hack/ind... [1] http…
> I'd also note that these companies are barely (if ever) held liable for life-compromising hacks on their platforms. You do know it is impossible to stop all cyber attacks? Its always a matter of when, not if. Zero day attacks are developed everyday with not even the best funded cyber security systems able to thwart them. The geniuses are on the offensive side, if they want in, they will get in.
From my random perusal of the various reports of compromises over the last few years, my impression is not that organisations tend to get hacked using the latest zero-day vulnerability, but rather that organisations get hacked because they have glaring security holes that you could drive a double-decker bus through.
For example, bcrypt has been around for how long now? And don't almost all the reports of hacks report that a database was lifted with usernames and passwords either in plaintext (for the love of all that is holy) or hashed with unsalted SHA1, or similar?