2 ms·
I think they're talking about the implication that if Apple don't pay, then the vulnerability is published. I agree with you on a moral basis: what difference
by young_unixer 6y ago
I think they're talking about the implication that if Apple don't pay, then the vulnerability is published.
I agree with you on a moral basis: what difference does it make if I get payed not to publish it vs. If I just publish it without even asking to get paid. But I'm not sure the law would agree with us.
- ClumsyPilot 6y agoI think, like in many legal matters, precedent and intent is key. Without ill intent there is no 'mens rea', or "guilty mind". In this case you aren't just a vigilante targetting apple, there is established practice stretching decades. There is also a duty on you as a security proffeshional, and there is a significant public interest in knowing about the vulnerability. So , most likely, it will be you doing your job.