2 ms·
Tell that to weev. His case was only overturned on a technicality. His conviction was for enumerating an unsecured API by sending requests that the server was f
by roywiggins 8y ago
Tell that to weev. His case was only overturned on a technicality. His conviction was for enumerating an unsecured API by sending requests that the server was free to ignore.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/04/11/hackertroll-weev-will-walk-free-but-the-court-didnt-rule-on-the-main-issue/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/04/11...
- bigiain 8y agoThere is a technical difference here though. weev was actively initiating that connection to somebody else's server. In this case, the honeypot is sitting idly, and _responding_ to someone else's connection (in a manner that's clearly unauthorised), and it's responding with something valid but unexpected. Not that I'd want my lawyer having to explain that difference to a jury...