321–330 of 502 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Door handles should be actively jiggled on the regs. If anything it's social behavior. Maybe you'll walk in on an orgy and get to join in!
That's what I'm going to tell the next inhabitant I meet while jiggling knobs!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a Canadian version of the EFF, or does the EFF have an Canadian branch?
A couple years ago, I asked Michael Geist[1] a similar question. Me: I am a Canadian citizen and am rather concerned by what appears to be increasing online censorship and erosion of privacy rights in Australia and the UK. If it can happen there, it can happen here. I'd like to do my part to ensure that we can effectively oppose bad public policy when it's proposed in Canada. I deeply respect both the EFF and the ACL…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Information accessible here was SUPPOSED to be all public, with sensitive information located elsewhere, however a handful of improperly redacted documents were also published to the site. Here's a more technical article: https://evandentremont.com/some-information-on-the-freedom-o...
I'm just surprised they didn't "redact" the documents by drawing black boxes over top of text in the Adobe Acrobat PDF editing tool... If their web presence is that clueless it seems like exactly the sort of thing that would happen. https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/05/pdf_radacting...
Federal Government ministers all have their phone bill summaries released as part of public record with private information removed.
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/how-hundreds-of-parliamentary-mo...
The contractor redacted the phone numbers in this instance by changing the font colour to white (same as the background) in the PDFs uploaded to the government disclosure website. So if you exported to text, or highlighted text, the phone numbers were clearly visible.
So most federal members of parliament, the former prime minister (Australia's equivalent of president) and opposition leader all had their numbers leaked.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that's a bit harsh. The documents at that URL were understood to be freely available to the public. As I physical analogy, I'd think about it more as one of those restaurant straw dispensers. He got tired of pressing the button each time for a new straw, and instead opened the lid and grabbed a bunch out.
Going to a restaurant and taking every single straw out of the top of the straw dispenser is clearly anti-social and is probably theft.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Going to a restaurant and taking every single straw out of the top of the straw dispenser is clearly anti-social and is probably theft.
But there’s a near infinite supply of straws and it didn’t damage the dispenser.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So this is a classic case of a subcontractor doing substandard work, leaving a security hole big enough to drive a truck through, and then trying to sue someone to save face... Sigh. If some of those documents weren't appropriate to be viewed by the general populace then the company was criminally negligent in their handling of the data, the "hacker" saw an open door with a sign reading "free information" on it and d…
And the cries by old geezers in charge, yet clueless of what it is they’re “in-charge of”, that he stole it are eye rolling It’s ageism but at this point I’m pretty convinced old people should be term limited from office The problems we seem to be facing are almost entirely due to their inability to move on Youth shouldn’t spend their lives kowtowing to geezers that quit thinking and are simply peddling what’s become…
Not Canadian, but I expect this teen to be let off completely free.
I write this as I'm trying to recover my wife's website by scraping archive.org and respecting various 400 & 500 level errors.
I am absolutely incensed reading this. The government made no reasonable effort to conceal the information and put it on a _publicly accessible_ web server. They made the information available to the public whether or not that was their intention. How can any reasonable person conclude that typing in an HTTP url qualifies as an illegal breach?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except this teenager was explicitly authorized to access all those files. He literally asked the web server "can I have these files" and it responded with "yes, you are authorized, here you go". If he wasn't authorized, the server should have responded with a 403 Forbidden! Web servers are built around authentication and access rights! It is not the teen's fault that the government doesn't know how to configure them…
Failure to properly secure one's private property does not make it legal for someone else to access it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Failure to properly secure one's private property does not make it legal for someone else to access it.
Except they’ve been given access. The server should represent its owners in its sharing of data.
It doesn't matter if we're talking about physical property in the real world or virtual property on a server.