4 ms·

I know that current caselaw holds that it's not a violation of the CFAA to portscan in the general case[1]. I'm not asking in the general case; I'm asking spec

I know that current caselaw holds that it's not a violation of the CFAA to portscan in the general case[1]. I'm not asking in the general case; I'm asking specifically in the case where the scans are regular and ongoing, and the scanning party has been explicitly given notice that they are unauthorized. [1]: https://nmap.org/book/legal-issues.html https://nmap.org/book/legal-issues.html

tokenizerrr 9y ago
"Stop looking at my house from the public street! It's not authorized!"
pfg 9y ago
The courts recently ruled on a similar case[1] and came to the conclusion that it was not a CFAA violation. That said, there's a difference between a public website such as LinkedIn and a host that just happens to be reachable over the internet, so I'm not sure it would be fully applicable. [1]: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/08/court-rejects-linkedin-claim-that-unauthorized-scraping-is-hacking/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/08/court-rejects-li...