5 ms·

The laws around digital access to networks are archaic and very broad, they were mostly defined in the 80s and 90s. I believe any unauthorized access (i.e. not

The laws around digital access to networks are archaic and very broad, they were mostly defined in the 80s and 90s. I believe any unauthorized access (i.e. not having consent from the owner/operator) to a private network is technically a crime. Even if the Jenkins server was open, I bet finding and using the S3 credentials would have crossed the line of the law. Those S3 buckets are private and if you didn't have permission to access them, even if you have the credentials because you found them elsewhere, you could be breaking the law.

account-5 4y ago
Regards the archaic laws I'm not convinced, they tend to just parallel real world crimes. For example if you parallel it to the real world then the crime of trespass covers the Jenkins server situation (you can trespass on land that is open and easy to access) and you still commit a crime if you enter a house where you found the key on the floor outside the door, which covers the S3 situation.
- asdfghjkuytrf 4y ago
  [flagged]
- dsfyu404ed 4y ago
  Trespass doesn't get you bent over in the shower of a federal prison. CFAA violations do.
  - account-5 4y ago
    Yes there's clearly a discrepancy regarding punishments but the point I was making was about the initial crimes. I'm also not saying I agree either; certainly a lot of the punishments for crimes in America seem disproportionate to the offences commited.
- janmo 4y ago
  Just accessing could also be seen as just looking through the window. And the lack of safety as a lack of curtain. Trespassing implies a presence, this could be seen as installing some software or code to maintain access on a system. Now let's imagine the OP went to the airline office and found that the door was open, on a desk there was a printed version of the nofly list, he takes a picture of each page and leaves. He would face 20 times less prison time.
  - account-5 4y ago
    Yeah as I've said I'm not commenting on the sentencing/punishments, I'm commenting on the offences.

account-5 4y ago

Regards the archaic laws I'm not convinced, they tend to just parallel real world crimes. For example if you parallel it to the real world then the crime of trespass covers the Jenkins server situation (you can trespass on land that is open and easy to access) and you still commit a crime if you enter a house where you found the key on the floor outside the door, which covers the S3 situation.

asdfghjkuytrf 4y ago
[flagged]
dsfyu404ed 4y ago
Trespass doesn't get you bent over in the shower of a federal prison. CFAA violations do.
- account-5 4y ago
  Yes there's clearly a discrepancy regarding punishments but the point I was making was about the initial crimes. I'm also not saying I agree either; certainly a lot of the punishments for crimes in America seem disproportionate to the offences commited.
janmo 4y ago
Just accessing could also be seen as just looking through the window. And the lack of safety as a lack of curtain. Trespassing implies a presence, this could be seen as installing some software or code to maintain access on a system. Now let's imagine the OP went to the airline office and found that the door was open, on a desk there was a printed version of the nofly list, he takes a picture of each page and leaves. He would face 20 times less prison time.
- account-5 4y ago
  Yeah as I've said I'm not commenting on the sentencing/punishments, I'm commenting on the offences.