3 ms·
> a request can only be considered malformed if it doesn't conform to the standards That is demonstrably false. I, personally, can consider any request malform
by mcherm 11y ago
> a request can only be considered malformed if it doesn't conform to the standards
That is demonstrably false. I, personally, can consider any request malformed unless it starts with the letter W. Regardless of what the standards say, I can think whatever I want to.
Similarly, the law can make up whatever rules IT wants to about the definition of "malformed". In that case, it pays some scant attention to things like standards, but mostly cares about "to the random guy-on-the-street (jury member or judge) did this seem like stealing". And there, I am afraid you lose.
- TheDong 11y agoThat argument doesn't matter thought. He didn't say "a request can only be considered malformed by mcherm's definition of the term if...". I could say "the sky is blue" and you could say "demonstrably false; the sky is personally red because I'm wearing colour-altering sunglasses". What he meant is obviously "a request can only be considered malformed (as defined by the commonly accepted definition of malformed) .." Your argument is fallacious. The courts will use common definitions of terms and have regard for context. However, what you're arguing about is even more pointless. The CFAA doesn't depend on the term "malformed" in any way, but on the term "authorized access". Your first sentence is not similar at all to your second; they're demonstrating first a blatant disregard for common definitions of terms, followed by praise of such common definitions.