Reporter may be prosecuted for using “view source”
1–10 of 168 posts
Re: Reporter may be prosecuted for using “view source”
#2On the one hand, as someone familiar with software and computer systems, it’s hard to see the prosecution winning. And the acquittal could prove stinging for the guv and the prosecutor. On the other hand, 12 Missouri citizens and a few appellate judges could convict and uphold, making things much less safe on line in Missouri.
Sad this thing is still going on. What’s really up with the governor?
Re: Reporter may be prosecuted for using “view source”
#3On the one hand, as someone familiar with software and computer systems, it’s hard to see the prosecution winning. And the acquittal could prove stinging for the guv and the prosecutor. On the other hand, 12 Missouri citizens and a few appellate judges could convict and uphold, making things much less safe on line in Missouri. Sad this thing is still going on. What’s really up with the governor?
> Sad this thing is still going on. What’s really up with the governor?
They are allergic to accountability it seems. That's why once it come out of their mouth, it is impossible for them to admit they fucked up. So double/triple/quadruple/quintuple-down is part of their playbook.
Re: Reporter may be prosecuted for using “view source”
#4Alas, yet another article that displays the incompetence of my state's governing body.
Re: Reporter may be prosecuted for using “view source”
#5I wonder if that governor will charge prisoners who look out the window for 'felonius escape rumination'
Re: Reporter may be prosecuted for using “view source”
#6Alas, yet another article that displays the incompetence of my state's governing body.
Incompetence would mean they have no clue. I genuinely believe that is not the case, and opportunity is really what this looks like here. I've found many politicians and legal professionals to really just use whatever they can to get what they want and throw as much at the wall to see what sticks.. Incompetence at least means some good faith that they do not know better, but I believe in most instances they do but they don't care.
Re: Reporter may be prosecuted for using “view source”
#7On the one hand, as someone familiar with software and computer systems, it’s hard to see the prosecution winning. And the acquittal could prove stinging for the guv and the prosecutor. On the other hand, 12 Missouri citizens and a few appellate judges could convict and uphold, making things much less safe on line in Missouri. Sad this thing is still going on. What’s really up with the governor?
Parson wasn't an elected governor initially. He was the Lt. Governor from an appointed position previous election cycle. Governor and Vice Governor resigned due to a scandal, and Parson took office similar to how Ford did after Nixon. Parson did win 're-election' riding on former President Trump's coattails.
Re: Reporter may be prosecuted for using “view source”
#8Alas, yet another article that displays the incompetence of my state's governing body.
This doesn’t sound like incompetence. Or at least, targeting a journalist for prosecution because he revealed your incompetence sounds like a step down a bad road.
Re: Reporter may be prosecuted for using “view source”
#9I have no idea how US courts work. Can whatever it is that's currently happening end in the reporter "winning" and possibly walking away with some compensation?
Re: Reporter may be prosecuted for using “view source”
#10We desperately need a law that says (or at least need people in power to understand that) if your server sends it (as an agent working on behalf of your interests), you decided it was ok for me to receive it! For HTTP this understanding is literally conveyed in the status code (200-OK). Once data is sent to the client, you can't say they are breaking the law by looking at it[0]. Anyone with a text-based browser would have seen this data right away without even having to use the Powerful Hacking Tool view source.
A law like this would also prevent the grave injustice of being considered a criminal for incrementing a query parameter to iterate through different records (weev/AT&T, I think). That also should never have been considered "hacking". Companies need to fix their damn auth instead of relying on the CFAA being overly generous to financially/politically-endowed interests. That law needs a neuter.
[0]: notwithstanding an actually-compromised server, which is no longer an agent working in its owners interest. We'd have to be very careful to word this law, but I believe we can do a lot better than what we've got today.