3 ms·

Which as I said would be perfectly fine. You then tell the owner of the binder that confidential information for other people is in the binder, and you get gra

Which as I said would be perfectly fine. You then tell the owner of the binder that confidential information for other people is in the binder, and you get gratitude. If once you find the information on page 346, you then keep flipping and looking at people's private information on the next hundred pages like the OP did, you have now committed a crime. The fact that you can easily access something, does not give you the right to access it. If you think otherwise, you think malware that steals your contact and banking info is legal. No, not the one that hacks into your computer. The solitaire game you download and install that has a trojan in it. After all, you gave the solitaire game access to your hard drive to save and read its own games. Perfectly fine for it to scan the rest of your files. You gave it access to your network card so you can upload your scores. Perfectly fine for it to capture all other network traffic. All trojans are now legal as long as they're packaged with software you voluntarily install.

gwd 5y ago
> If once you find the information on page 346, you then keep flipping and looking at people's private information on the next hundred pages like the OP did, you have now committed a crime. I agree that morally, the guy should certainly not have continued to look through what he knew was private information he wasn't meant to have access to. I'm not sure the law sees a difference between looking at pages 347-350 and and looking at page 346 however.
- soylentnewsorg 5y ago
  I am sure the law sees the difference. Intent is what makes the difference between a murder charge and the death penalty, and supervision with a suspended sentence for manslaughter, when you hit a person driving drunk. Page 346 was an accident - your intent was to read Your data. In viewing Further pages, as the OP stated for the explicit purpose of viewing other people's confidential medical data, the intent is a crime. It's the same thing as walking up to someone's desk in an office you're allowed to be in, and looking through their files.
  - gwd 5y ago
    You didn't know for sure that page 346 would have private data, and that you'd be able to turn the page; but there was a reasonable probability that you would in fact see private data. If someone died instead of having their privacy violated, it would certainly be classified as manslaughter (i.e., you were doing something you knew might be "dangerous") rather than just a plain accident where there was no fault. I don't know what the actual law is, but given the benefits to society of "good people" reporting this kind of issue, I think that toying around with something like that should be considered not a crime at all, rather than being considered a lower-severity crime.
    - soylentnewsorg 5y ago
      I never claimed page 346 was breaking the law. I claimed after you discover that the action reveals private data, and you repeat that action a bunch of times for the explicit purpose of getting more private data, you are now a criminal. This is what the OP very clearly stated he did. He did not report the issue after finding it. He abused the security hole for his own benefit. He is a criminal. Low severity? In civil court, they can take every penny he has, every penny he'll ever earn, and his house. In criminal court, he can be charged with unauthorized access to a computer system, one charge each time he did it. And he did it a lot, and they have logs. Which is all literally in his post. Viewing other people's medical information is not a low severity crime btw.

gwd 5y ago

> If once you find the information on page 346, you then keep flipping and looking at people's private information on the next hundred pages like the OP did, you have now committed a crime. I agree that morally, the guy should certainly not have continued to look through what he knew was private information he wasn't meant to have access to. I'm not sure the law sees a difference between looking at pages 347-350 and and looking at page 346 however.

soylentnewsorg 5y ago
I am sure the law sees the difference. Intent is what makes the difference between a murder charge and the death penalty, and supervision with a suspended sentence for manslaughter, when you hit a person driving drunk. Page 346 was an accident - your intent was to read Your data. In viewing Further pages, as the OP stated for the explicit purpose of viewing other people's confidential medical data, the intent is a crime. It's the same thing as walking up to someone's desk in an office you're allowed to be in, and looking through their files.
- gwd 5y ago
  You didn't know for sure that page 346 would have private data, and that you'd be able to turn the page; but there was a reasonable probability that you would in fact see private data. If someone died instead of having their privacy violated, it would certainly be classified as manslaughter (i.e., you were doing something you knew might be "dangerous") rather than just a plain accident where there was no fault. I don't know what the actual law is, but given the benefits to society of "good people" reporting this kind of issue, I think that toying around with something like that should be considered not a crime at all, rather than being considered a lower-severity crime.
  - soylentnewsorg 5y ago
    I never claimed page 346 was breaking the law. I claimed after you discover that the action reveals private data, and you repeat that action a bunch of times for the explicit purpose of getting more private data, you are now a criminal. This is what the OP very clearly stated he did. He did not report the issue after finding it. He abused the security hole for his own benefit. He is a criminal. Low severity? In civil court, they can take every penny he has, every penny he'll ever earn, and his house. In criminal court, he can be charged with unauthorized access to a computer system, one charge each time he did it. And he did it a lot, and they have logs. Which is all literally in his post. Viewing other people's medical information is not a low severity crime btw.