5 ms·

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 webp

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.

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.