3 ms·
The onus should be on the service operators to clearly define what's authorized and what isn't; and if they miss something, the liability should be borne by the
by CiPHPerCoder 7y ago
The onus should be on the service operators to clearly define what's authorized and what isn't; and if they miss something, the liability should be borne by the service operator, not the person who found their gap.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- gowld 7y agoDefine via ToS, or technical countermeasures? In the meatspace world, we use ToS and expectations (like don't ransack my house even if he door is unlocked).
- CiPHPerCoder 7y agoTechnical countermeasures. My proposal would require companies to actually take security very seriously. https://www.troyhunt.com/we-take-security-seriously-otherwise/ https://www.troyhunt.com/we-take-security-seriously-otherwis...
- threatofrain 7y agoWhat about someone who “Zoom bombs” a prime minister? Is that hacking? Espionage?
- CiPHPerCoder 7y agoWhy the hell are prime ministers using Zoom in the course of their civic duty? Are they discussing national secrets over Zoom? Without end-to-end encryption?! That's some form of criminal negligence and/or mishandling of classified information in every jurisdiction I know. If not, it's little more than a nuisance and a reminder that Zoom should not be relied on for important communications.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- threatofrain 7y agoIt's known that PM Boris Johnson used Zoom recently for a cabinet meeting, with all the Zoom ID's published.