We do. It's called an election. What you want is credentialing requirements for voting.
I'm pretty sure I want credentialing requirements for anyone running for any public office. I'd settle for automatic exclusion of anyone displaying narcissistic, psychopathic, or sociopathic tendencies and inclusion of rational pragmatists.
I would also "settle" for picking the people I like.
Also, pretty sure that you have to be at least somewhat narcissistic to think that you should be president, and somewhat sociopathic to actually succeed.
So? Something being "normal" doesn't make it just. Or even legal.
Its not normal in society to commit domestic violence, most people in western society would find themselves ostracized from their peers if they were a known wife / child abuser. If I told my friends the website allowed me to see other plans and I checked them out they would just ask if I saw anything interesting and chuckle at the flaw. Curiosity is normal; beating your spouse is not.
"... Social Security numbers were contained in HTML source code of the pages." "Gov. Mike Parson was labeling the Post-Dispatch reporter a 'hacker' and vowing to seek criminal prosecution." L O L. Everyone who has hit F12 in a browser is now considered a hacker. I hope the prosecutors and law enforcement come to the right conclusion quickly and tell the governor no crime was committed. My experiences have left me wit…
"You can look like idiots now. Or you can try to keep from looking like idiots, and look like even bigger idiots very quickly. Your choice."
And, in the process, double down and cost the reporter his career and entire life savings as he pays for a lawyer to keep himself out of jail.
Read more history! (Especially read what the Wilson administration did to the Socialists - the origin of the phrase "yelling fire in a crowded theater." Many of us would riot if this happened today.) Stories like this have been happening since long before I was born, and will continue to happen long after I die, because voters will continue to elect stupid people some fraction of the time. The correct response isn't…
The correct response isn't nihilism, but constant vigilance, and constant shaming of elected officials who abuse their powers. I want to believe that, but after watching the Trump administration and how people seemed to embrace him more and more despite his continuing shameful acts, it's just hard to sustain belief that this all leads anywhere. Sorry guys, not trying to be Debbie Downer here. I guess I'm just in a sh…
Yeah, even leaving aside the T-word; there's a broad swath of the US population who are willing to believe anything that is expected of them by their chosen authorities (mainstream Democrats are as guilty of this as Republicans, they just chose different authority figures). Sometimes, insanity is the only sane response to an insane world.
I can't stress how differently power works in the Southern States (EDIT: Missouri is a midwestern state officially, but I've always considered it part of the South). It's a very traditional place, where you do not dare contradict, let alone correct, your boss. There is none of this "avoid surrounding yourself with sycophants because they will only tell you what you want to hear" business. There is no upside to speaki…
Missouri is not even remotely considered to be in "the south". At least not by those who live there or in neighboring states.
I know a lot of people who regard it as a hybrid southern/midwestern state. Plenty of confederate flags to be found in Missouri, certainly, and the MU/KU rivalry is, on our side at least, heavy on "bleeding Kansas" rhetoric and imagery, which keeps Missouri's Southern-sympathizing role in the war alive in our popular culture (such as it is). Lots and lots of our local icons, oft-mentioned historical figures, et c., relate back to the war, and especially folks who supported the Confederacy. County seats with those late-addition cheap confederate soldier memorial-statutes outside the courthouse are, AFAIK, quite common in the state.
After the Affordable Care Act went into effect I signed our company up for our state's marketplace. While browsing our plan options, I noticed the url used a scheme like marketplace.org/employers/341/plans.aspx. Of course, I tried changing the number in the url to 342 to see what happened. To my astonishment, it loaded up the next company's plans, including a list of employee names, ages, plan cost, and SSNs. After I…
> After I shopped a few other companies to see how our plans compared Yeah once you start using a vulnerability maliciously to obtain confidential data for your own personal gain, even if its a stupid vulnerability, you're not really good-guy security researcher anymore. If all you did was the bare minimum to demonstrate the vuln exists, that's cool. If after you do that you continue to use it to obtain confidential…
> malicious actor
malice implies intent. If we take author at their word, there wasn't any, though you could say they took it too far by looking at other stuff they probably knew it was ethically wrong to do so.
Though, sometimes it isn't clear you're in compromising territory until you're in it.
If any of the confidential information obtained wrongly gets used to advantage … that's malice.
If the parent set out to exploit the insurer by finding inconsistent/unfair pricing, etc etc … that's malice.
I dunno, this seems pretty normal. Just today news broke that in Germany some guy who found a flaw in a web-shop backend leaking the data of hundreds of thousands of people got raided, because the operator reported him to the police - and somehow both police and state attorney found it wise to prosecute him instead of referring the case to the GDPR officer to fine the operator. It's pretty obvious that when you find…
All this reminds me of the case of Lilith Wittmann [1], who got sued by the CDU (Germany's majority-holding party) in May 2021 because she discovered a security flaw in their election campaign app "CDU connect". Data from around 100.000 visitors and 18.500 election campaign helpers was not sufficiently secured. She used responsible disclosure to let the CDU know of this flaw, got sued in response. After an outcry fro…
Sad to hear just how common these sorts of stories are. I remember reading fairly recently about a guy who reported a flaw to a company working with the NHS in the UK (should emphasise this is an external company and not the NHS themselves) and ended up having to crowdfund his legal battle.
Asking for the next file isn't false pretenses. I don't know if this analogy works quite right. Even rifling through a file cabinet wouldn't be false pretenses, it would be something else. And you have to cause injury for it to be fraud. Is "Help I was too honest to a customer." a valid injury claim?
I think the analogy would be going up to the desk and saying: my id number is X (when its really Y), can i have my file. If you convince them that you really are X and they give you the file, i think that would be considerd fraudulent. Whether or not an injury takes place to raise it to the level of fraud i guess depends on what was in the file, but in countries with strong privacy laws, someone would probably be in…
He had already given his correct details to be able to view plans. It’s like calling the cops to get your accident report then asking for the next higher numbers and they give it to you.
Language cheapens itself when spoken cheaply. Abusing over the top terminology on minute areas of controversy will ultimately lesson the impact of your outrage when something actually bad comes along. Someone browsing healthcare plans available to other employees of different companies is not something that should win you the label “malicious actor” and come associated with other implications. This data leaking harms…
I used the word "malicious". Its not like i used the word "murderer" or "evil overlord". I'm not saying OP should go to jail or anything. All i'm saying is if you find an exploit, and after you verify it works, you contunue to use it for your own personal ends, you're no longer benign and you shouldn't expect a warm welcome from the security team. The line is when you start to use exploits on computers not owned by y…
> you contunue to use it for your own personal ends
I think this is what people may have been missing from your original post: at some point things can go from innocent to malicious.
"Crime of convenience" is the most common type, after all.
"I'm not the type to steal, but the cash was left on the counter, and …"
I don't think I can blame a politician for being technically illiterate, especially one that old. But what the heck is up with the state bureaucrats who report to that guy? I mean someone it the freaking state bureaucratic hierarchy should at least be lucid enough to consult someone who has an actual clue about things as these.
Gov. Parsons’ technical ignorance, such as it may be, is not the source of this. This is a power-oriented political narrative. To the extent it invokes inaccurate explicit or implicit characterizations, that is not because Parsons doesn't understand the truth (he may or may not, that's just irrelevant), but because the descriptions and implications serve the desired narrative.