3 ms·

Medhelp has filed a police report against the reporting paper ComputerSweden late last night: https://omni.se/medhelp-polisanmaler-tidning-efter-avslojande/a/8

Medhelp has filed a police report against the reporting paper ComputerSweden late last night: https://omni.se/medhelp-polisanmaler-tidning-efter-avslojande/a/8wy6GW https://omni.se/medhelp-polisanmaler-tidning-efter-avslojand...

bjourne 8y ago
The crappy thing is that the psycho CEO that filed charges is 100% right. The journalist willfully and knowingly committed a data breach. There are no provisions in the law for "I did it for a good cause" or "I only demonstrated that it was possible." Of course if he hadn't, he wouldn't have been able to write a story about it and the security holes would not have become public knowledge. The laws in these areas are insanely antiquated and this is not the first time investigated people in power have tried to use them to silence or smear journalists. Freedom of speech is threatened.
- bjoli 8y ago
  On the other hand, the journalist couldn't have known it was a data breach until he/she actually verified that it was classified healthcare data. The case should be dismissed.
- m-s 8y ago
  If I understand correctly, the journalist did nothing more than accessing an entirely unsecured, public website.
  - emerongi 8y ago
    I think in this case the argument actually applies. There is no action on the user's part that signifies bad intent. Maybe if they downloaded too many of the files, but otherwise I wouldn't expect the accusation to stick.
- xorcist 8y ago
  There must have been some intent for it to be a crime. It is not illegal to click on a public link on the web. Accessing sensitive data is not a crime in itself. These accusations seem completely baseless. The data was public and could probably be found using one of several public search engines. Apart from that, the journalists could also claim they were given the link by someone, in which case it would even be illegal to investigate the source. This lawsuit was not filed to win.
  - tapland 8y ago
    They were given the link by a source. Some individual who found it on shodan or similar. As an individual I wouldn't want to publish info on a security breach though.
- bjornroberg 8y ago
  Diversionary tactics is the only thing it is.
Yetanfou 8y ago
He obviously has not heard of the Streisand effect [1] - not that any amplification of the issue at hand is needed here. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
- tapland 8y ago
  But it didn't seem to work. News have completely died down.
  - Yetanfou 8y ago
    Yes, it is strange the way news like this gets buried so quickly. At least the lawsuit will make sure it will pop up every now and then, even if only in alternative media and possibly in ComputerSweden - although they might keep quiet about it while the lawsuit progresses.

bjourne 8y ago

The crappy thing is that the psycho CEO that filed charges is 100% right. The journalist willfully and knowingly committed a data breach. There are no provisions in the law for "I did it for a good cause" or "I only demonstrated that it was possible." Of course if he hadn't, he wouldn't have been able to write a story about it and the security holes would not have become public knowledge. The laws in these areas are insanely antiquated and this is not the first time investigated people in power have tried to use them to silence or smear journalists. Freedom of speech is threatened.

bjoli 8y ago
On the other hand, the journalist couldn't have known it was a data breach until he/she actually verified that it was classified healthcare data. The case should be dismissed.
m-s 8y ago
If I understand correctly, the journalist did nothing more than accessing an entirely unsecured, public website.
- emerongi 8y ago
  I think in this case the argument actually applies. There is no action on the user's part that signifies bad intent. Maybe if they downloaded too many of the files, but otherwise I wouldn't expect the accusation to stick.
xorcist 8y ago
There must have been some intent for it to be a crime. It is not illegal to click on a public link on the web. Accessing sensitive data is not a crime in itself. These accusations seem completely baseless. The data was public and could probably be found using one of several public search engines. Apart from that, the journalists could also claim they were given the link by someone, in which case it would even be illegal to investigate the source. This lawsuit was not filed to win.
- tapland 8y ago
  They were given the link by a source. Some individual who found it on shodan or similar. As an individual I wouldn't want to publish info on a security breach though.
bjornroberg 8y ago
Diversionary tactics is the only thing it is.

Yetanfou 8y ago

He obviously has not heard of the Streisand effect [1] - not that any amplification of the issue at hand is needed here. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

tapland 8y ago
But it didn't seem to work. News have completely died down.
- Yetanfou 8y ago
  Yes, it is strange the way news like this gets buried so quickly. At least the lawsuit will make sure it will pop up every now and then, even if only in alternative media and possibly in ComputerSweden - although they might keep quiet about it while the lawsuit progresses.