5 ms·

Good points - Capital One did have a duty to care more than just for their own data. My beef is with the comment that somehow the criminal is less responsible

by toss1 4y ago

Good points - Capital One did have a duty to care more than just for their own data. My beef is with the comment that somehow the criminal is less responsible for the crime. It is not like they entrapped the person to do the crime.

jedberg 4y ago
Assigning responsibility is always a moral judgement and different people will come up with different answers based on their own morality. If someone walks into the bank and the doors are wide open, no one is there, and the vault is just open, so they decide to grab some visible valuables, how much responsibility is actually on the thief? I mean obviously there is some responsibility, but how much is more of a moral judgement than anything else.
- toss1 4y ago
  Fun example! Agree, it's all judgement, and there's clearly a broad spectrum. Some good example points on it might include: * Implemented all possible security measures, above and beyond reasonable, but were breached by a nation-state actor. * Took reasonable professional-standards measures, but were breached by professional thieves. * Took most standard measures, missed some, but were breached by a modestly skilled thief. * Were somewhat negligent and some people found an unlocked door and stole the goods. * Created an attractive nuisance, too tempting for some people to avoid, and some people looted the place. * Left the goods out on the sidewalk and were surprised when people helped themselves. In all but the last sidewalk example, I'd say the taker has full responsibility as a thief - an honest person would not get involved, and a skeptical person would wonder if it was a honeytrap. All but the last two examples require not only dishonesty, but also require specific planning and actions to get the goods. In all but the last two examples, I'd say that the taker is responsible for their acts, and nothing about the owner's actions mitigates that. That said, the protector of the goods also has full responsibility for taking appropriate measures for the reasonably foreseeable threats. I guess I'd put it as responsibility is not divided but added or multiplied by the parties.

by toss1 4y ago

jedberg 4y ago

Assigning responsibility is always a moral judgement and different people will come up with different answers based on their own morality. If someone walks into the bank and the doors are wide open, no one is there, and the vault is just open, so they decide to grab some visible valuables, how much responsibility is actually on the thief? I mean obviously there is some responsibility, but how much is more of a moral judgement than anything else.

toss1 4y ago
Fun example! Agree, it's all judgement, and there's clearly a broad spectrum. Some good example points on it might include: * Implemented all possible security measures, above and beyond reasonable, but were breached by a nation-state actor. * Took reasonable professional-standards measures, but were breached by professional thieves. * Took most standard measures, missed some, but were breached by a modestly skilled thief. * Were somewhat negligent and some people found an unlocked door and stole the goods. * Created an attractive nuisance, too tempting for some people to avoid, and some people looted the place. * Left the goods out on the sidewalk and were surprised when people helped themselves. In all but the last sidewalk example, I'd say the taker has full responsibility as a thief - an honest person would not get involved, and a skeptical person would wonder if it was a honeytrap. All but the last two examples require not only dishonesty, but also require specific planning and actions to get the goods. In all but the last two examples, I'd say that the taker is responsible for their acts, and nothing about the owner's actions mitigates that. That said, the protector of the goods also has full responsibility for taking appropriate measures for the reasonably foreseeable threats. I guess I'd put it as responsibility is not divided but added or multiplied by the parties.