6 ms·

"A better analogy would be you're walking in the street past a neighbor's house and notice their front door wide open with no one around. You can see a purse an

"A better analogy would be you're walking in the street past a neighbor's house and notice their front door wide open with no one around. You can see a purse and car keys near the door. You phone that neighbor, and tell them their door is open and their purse and keys are easily visible from the street. Would Parson consider this breaking and entering?" This was only a few lines below that.

denton-scratch 5y ago
That's not a better analogy. The implication is that somehow the raw HTML is more valuable than the rendered webpage. You don't get to publish a "rendered webpage"; what you publish is raw HTML. If you didn't want people to read it, you didn't ought to have published it. [Edit] Also, taking a copy of the HTML isn't like taking keys and a purse. If you take keys and a purse, the owner has been deprived of them. That's not the case with taking a copy of a webpage.
- rich_sasha 5y ago
  It’s a good analogy in terms of how far the “breaking into” stuff you go. The journalist literally only saw what you legitimately see from the street, just as “view source” only shows you what you’re supposed to see anyway. As far as the technical analogy goes, I’d probably agree.
  - netizen-936824 5y ago
    The technical analogy is the only correct one. The other analogies are just plain wrong. This data is what forms the page that is displayed and is accessible to anyone that can tap the server. This data is what they broadcast to the public You wouldn't be able to go and shout a bunch of SSNs in the middle of the street and then prosecute anyone who was listening
    - shadowgovt 5y ago
      Yep. When Google Street View cars hoovered up in-the-clear wifi data, the most they were ever punished was $25k for impeding the FCC's investigation, not for the actual data collection. Shouting your information in public is not and should not be grounds to prosecute those who are listening.
    - rich_sasha 5y ago
      The accusation is of (1) theft using (2) technology. So there's two aspects to it. That you focus on the technology side, fine, but don't dismiss people who say the "theft" is not in fact theft, regardless of "technology" involved.
      - netizen-936824 5y ago
        If I throw a sack of potatoes into the street, I don't think it would be theft to take a picture of them and mail it to me saying "hey bro you dropped yer taters"
  - bobthechef 5y ago
- Wowfunhappy 5y ago
  The keys and purse don’t represent the raw html, they represent the social security numbers that were visible in the raw html. The front door was wide open in that this information should have been kept in the backend, not the frontend. It's a good analogy.
  - TechBro8615 5y ago
    It's not a good analogy because your browser is your house. The "open front door" analogy works in some instances of "hacking," like enumerating an ID field in a URL. But in those cases you are making an active request to "enter the door" for each ID. That's not the case here – you downloaded a page you have access to, and the server included more data in the page than it should have, without you asking for it. It's like somebody tossed a phone book into your open door, and then prosecuted you for reading it.
    - Wowfunhappy 5y ago
      Does it really matter whether you're in your own house or standing on the public street? The good Samaritan in the analogy didn't go through the open door. They just phoned their neighbor to warn them: "Hey, your door is open, leaving your purse in plain view. You should probably fix that!" A bad actor would have actually stolen the purse. Just like a bad actor would have used the social security numbers to commit identify fraud. Since neither of those things happened, prosecuting anyone is ridiculous, in both the analogy and real life.
- skinkestek 5y ago
  SSNs were available in the source but not in the visible web page. I say the example is good.
  - denton-scratch 5y ago
    What's visible depends on what you use to view the webpage. GET / HTTP/1.1 If you don't happen to have a GUI ([Edit] or something like Lynx), that's how you read a website. It's not reverse engineering, or de-compiling; that's just displaying exactly what the server served.
salawat 5y ago
You're going down dicey waters there. Say your neighbor has an atrium and gets medication delivered. Said medication is clearly labeled as light/heat sensitive, and the package is left by the delivery person in direct sunlight. Their front door is unlocked. You open the door and tuck the package safely inside. Breaking and entering? Anyone telling me that qualifies has some serious thinking on Mens Rea to do.
- TechBro8615 5y ago
  You had me in the first half. I think the better completion of this analogy would be: You ordered some medication, and the delivery guy drops it in your atrium. You open the package and find that it includes your neighbor's medication, too. You tell the delivery guy that he sent your neighbor's medication. The delivery guy calls the police and requests you be arrested.
- tharkun__ 5y ago
  Technically yes, you are breaking and entering under what I can find as the legal definition of breaking and entering in the US (IANAL and don't live in the US even): https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/breaking_and_entering https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/breaking_and_entering Breaking and entering is the entering of a building through force without authorization. The slightest force including pushing open a door is all that is necessary. Breaking also includes entering a building through fraud, threats, or collusion. To constitute entering, it is sufficient if any part of the accused’s body is introduced within a building. It is not considered breaking and entering if the premises are at the time open to the public or the person is licensed or privileged to enter. So the fact that you wanted to do a good deed is not relevant for it being considered breaking and entering. If only the door was already open and you shoved the package inside without actually ever even having an atom of your fingertip enter the house itself, then it would not have been "breaking and entering". I completely agree though that nobody in their right mind should want to prosecute you for this. This is the differences between the actual letter of the law as it would be applied by a computer algorithm automatically and a good judge / jury that interprets the law and the facts.
  - 5y ago
accountofme 5y ago
I think a better analogy is that you requested a document about yourself from the state and a bureaucrat sent you your document and a whole bunch more you didn't ask for that was encoded using pig latin.
TechBro8615 5y ago
I don't think the analogies about "someone else's house" work in the reporter's favor, whether the door was open or not. The data was included in source code that the server sent to the client in the normal course of operations. It's more like if the New York Times dropped a newspaper at your house with the answers to next week's crossword puzzle included on the page.

denton-scratch 5y ago

That's not a better analogy. The implication is that somehow the raw HTML is more valuable than the rendered webpage. You don't get to publish a "rendered webpage"; what you publish is raw HTML. If you didn't want people to read it, you didn't ought to have published it. [Edit] Also, taking a copy of the HTML isn't like taking keys and a purse. If you take keys and a purse, the owner has been deprived of them. That's not the case with taking a copy of a webpage.

rich_sasha 5y ago
It’s a good analogy in terms of how far the “breaking into” stuff you go. The journalist literally only saw what you legitimately see from the street, just as “view source” only shows you what you’re supposed to see anyway. As far as the technical analogy goes, I’d probably agree.
- netizen-936824 5y ago
  The technical analogy is the only correct one. The other analogies are just plain wrong. This data is what forms the page that is displayed and is accessible to anyone that can tap the server. This data is what they broadcast to the public You wouldn't be able to go and shout a bunch of SSNs in the middle of the street and then prosecute anyone who was listening
  - shadowgovt 5y ago
    Yep. When Google Street View cars hoovered up in-the-clear wifi data, the most they were ever punished was $25k for impeding the FCC's investigation, not for the actual data collection. Shouting your information in public is not and should not be grounds to prosecute those who are listening.
  - rich_sasha 5y ago
    The accusation is of (1) theft using (2) technology. So there's two aspects to it. That you focus on the technology side, fine, but don't dismiss people who say the "theft" is not in fact theft, regardless of "technology" involved.
    - netizen-936824 5y ago
      If I throw a sack of potatoes into the street, I don't think it would be theft to take a picture of them and mail it to me saying "hey bro you dropped yer taters"
- bobthechef 5y ago
Wowfunhappy 5y ago
The keys and purse don’t represent the raw html, they represent the social security numbers that were visible in the raw html. The front door was wide open in that this information should have been kept in the backend, not the frontend. It's a good analogy.
- TechBro8615 5y ago
  It's not a good analogy because your browser is your house. The "open front door" analogy works in some instances of "hacking," like enumerating an ID field in a URL. But in those cases you are making an active request to "enter the door" for each ID. That's not the case here – you downloaded a page you have access to, and the server included more data in the page than it should have, without you asking for it. It's like somebody tossed a phone book into your open door, and then prosecuted you for reading it.
  - Wowfunhappy 5y ago
    Does it really matter whether you're in your own house or standing on the public street? The good Samaritan in the analogy didn't go through the open door. They just phoned their neighbor to warn them: "Hey, your door is open, leaving your purse in plain view. You should probably fix that!" A bad actor would have actually stolen the purse. Just like a bad actor would have used the social security numbers to commit identify fraud. Since neither of those things happened, prosecuting anyone is ridiculous, in both the analogy and real life.
skinkestek 5y ago
SSNs were available in the source but not in the visible web page. I say the example is good.
- denton-scratch 5y ago
  What's visible depends on what you use to view the webpage. GET / HTTP/1.1 If you don't happen to have a GUI ([Edit] or something like Lynx), that's how you read a website. It's not reverse engineering, or de-compiling; that's just displaying exactly what the server served.

salawat 5y ago

You're going down dicey waters there. Say your neighbor has an atrium and gets medication delivered. Said medication is clearly labeled as light/heat sensitive, and the package is left by the delivery person in direct sunlight. Their front door is unlocked. You open the door and tuck the package safely inside. Breaking and entering? Anyone telling me that qualifies has some serious thinking on Mens Rea to do.

TechBro8615 5y ago
You had me in the first half. I think the better completion of this analogy would be: You ordered some medication, and the delivery guy drops it in your atrium. You open the package and find that it includes your neighbor's medication, too. You tell the delivery guy that he sent your neighbor's medication. The delivery guy calls the police and requests you be arrested.
tharkun__ 5y ago
Technically yes, you are breaking and entering under what I can find as the legal definition of breaking and entering in the US (IANAL and don't live in the US even): https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/breaking_and_entering https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/breaking_and_entering Breaking and entering is the entering of a building through force without authorization. The slightest force including pushing open a door is all that is necessary. Breaking also includes entering a building through fraud, threats, or collusion. To constitute entering, it is sufficient if any part of the accused’s body is introduced within a building. It is not considered breaking and entering if the premises are at the time open to the public or the person is licensed or privileged to enter. So the fact that you wanted to do a good deed is not relevant for it being considered breaking and entering. If only the door was already open and you shoved the package inside without actually ever even having an atom of your fingertip enter the house itself, then it would not have been "breaking and entering". I completely agree though that nobody in their right mind should want to prosecute you for this. This is the differences between the actual letter of the law as it would be applied by a computer algorithm automatically and a good judge / jury that interprets the law and the facts.
- 5y ago

accountofme 5y ago

I think a better analogy is that you requested a document about yourself from the state and a bureaucrat sent you your document and a whole bunch more you didn't ask for that was encoded using pig latin.

TechBro8615 5y ago

I don't think the analogies about "someone else's house" work in the reporter's favor, whether the door was open or not. The data was included in source code that the server sent to the client in the normal course of operations. It's more like if the New York Times dropped a newspaper at your house with the answers to next week's crossword puzzle included on the page.