11 ms·

I wonder if we’ll see the day where legal laws change to either condone or just ignore activities like this. I feel like if we did we’d see more good things ha

I wonder if we’ll see the day where legal laws change to either condone or just ignore activities like this. I feel like if we did we’d see more good things happening.

marricks 3y ago
Growing public fruit trees, handing out food, stopping to help an injured person, all of those are illegal in some jurisdictions or can get you into serious legal trouble. That is because laws exist not just to stop bad things but also to stop good things from happening, or at least centralize how good things are done. I mean, otherwise what would happen? We’d all probably just take care of each other, and we can’t have that happening.
- throwawayadvsec 3y ago
  "stopping to help an injured person," can you be more specific please? where and in which case?
  - jagged-chisel 3y ago
    Being held liable for attempting to help but making things worse.
  - whynotmaybe 3y ago
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law
    - NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
      You know, one aspect that doesn't appear to be covered in that article is scams. There are often scams perpetrated where someone fakes injury or accident, either to create a diversion, or to attract wannabe "Good Samaritans" who come to render assistance and then find themselves pickpocketed or in worse trouble than they started out. There are also people who pretend to be out of gas and just need a can filled at the local service station. A guy came up to me at a train station and showed me all his sores, and I offered to take him to the drugstore and purchase some bandages, but the only reason he was showing me sores was because he was a panhandler and he wanted cash. I stay away from anyone who looks like they require assistance. Life is too short. I am not a professional first responder and it's not my job to diagnose or treat any illness or injury. I may call 911 if I see something unambiguously egregious, but nowadays, there are usually so many witnesses carrying mobile phones that I don't need to bother.
      - throwaway92700 3y ago
        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect
        NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
        Thanks for the commentary-free Wikipedia article link, but in skimming across it, I don't see any significant mention of the cases I discussed which are scammers who are faking it. The article chiefly seems to be concerned with real, or perceived real, emergencies, and how they relate to large crowds of witnesses. If is often the case that scammers who are faking distress will isolate and approach potential victims rather than attract a crowd. Especially with people who lurk outside of grocery stores or some other venue. Once I was approached by an "out of gas" individual at a rather lonely intersection of downtown. There were no other witnesses around, until an official in a uniform vest came to intervene.
      - tudorw 3y ago
        I don't stay away. I frequently get stuck in, calling the police, ambulance and fire services for people, assisting epileptics in shops and planes, helping lost children, picking up random dogs and returning them to their owners... Why do you think life is too short, I've always thought it the perfect length, do divulge what it is that takes the time for you?
        NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
        I suppose you're just the epitome of a good samaritan in the right place at the right time. None of that stuff happens to me. How would I assist an epileptic, or a lost child, in a way that could not be better done by a professional who is trained and commissioned to do such things? I would do more harm than good, me, a stranger in a big city, putting my nose in where it doesn't belong. Especially with minor children. That's unthinkable--where are their parents? If I found a minor without her parents then I would contact authorities, not try to place myself at risk, because whatever separated her from her parents, must be bad news. I do charitable works through the organizations where I am a member. I assist in humanitarian missions in an organized way, not as a stranger on the street with a mobile phone. My life is too short to get caught up in strangers' drama, because that will definitely shorten my life, and possibly also drain my pocketbook, place marks on my criminal record, or indeed put my own self at risk of injury. The cost is too great and there is no reward for random involvement like that. As I said, it usually turns out to be a scam anyway.
    - kneebonian 3y ago
      This law specifically states that you cannot be held legally liable for rendering aid. Not that it is against the law to help people.
      - Moomoomoo309 3y ago
        It covers it in specific cases for specific people. If you help someone not in those specific cases and/or are not that specific kind of person, you can be punished for it.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- NegativeK 3y ago
  That's a hyperbolic and rhetorical interpretation of what's going on with this patching.
  - marricks 3y ago
    I'm replying to the comment not the article.
- jon-wood 3y ago
  In all of those cases I’m pretty sure you can’t in fact be arrested just for the act as described. You need to be in some way negligent or malicious in doing so, and in most countries at least you have to be extremely negligent to get prosecuted for anything done while rendering aid to an injured person. Even more generally, some form of harm needs to be shown to prosecute. Unfortunately there’s an increasingly broad definition of “harm”, at least here in the UK, but for now you do have to really screw up in any of the cases you’ve listed.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
> I feel like if we did we’d see more good things happening. The problem is that we'd see more bad things happening. This time someone correctly patched the devices, but maybe next time they make a mistake and leave things more vulnerable, and the next time someone just bricks devices outright because they decide that's better than vulnerable devices on the open internet.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
neilv 3y ago
Someone who decides to mess non-consensually with 100,000 other people's network routers... Maybe it's a bit like the saying about politicians: you don't want anyone who would want the job.
boomboomsubban 3y ago
While it may be possible for this person to face criminal charges, I doubt any police force or attorney general would really want to investigate or charge this person. And a civil case would require the claimant to prove damages, which they'd struggle to do. So aren't we already at a point where this is condoned/ignored?
- thephyber 3y ago
  Perhaps for one person doing it a few times and competently patching systems. What happens when a more novice grey hat tries it and bricks the machines? What happens if they patch the routers with software patches that have embedded malware? Ultimately, patching systems on the internet means you are very likely crossing jurisdictional boundaries, so beware what governments you might piss off. Personally, I like that prosecutors in the US are ethically bound to understand why the suspect did what they did (their intentions/motivations) and that prosecutors have the duty to prosecute only cases that they can convince juries to convict on. More than that, prosecutors rarely have lots of spare cycles, so they have to plan+choose their prosecution resources judiciously. And then civil liability is very different from criminal prosecution.
  - boomboomsubban 3y ago
    >What happens when a more novice grey hat tries it and bricks the machines? What happens if they patch the routers with software patches that have embedded malware? Then a civil claim could show damages, or there would be some amount of motivation for the state to go after them.
Barrin92 3y ago
Belgium did just that a few months ago: https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/en/2023/02/15/ethical-hackers-can-now-legally-hack-belgian-companies/ https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/en/2023/02/15/ethical-hackers-can-...

I wonder if we’ll see the day where legal laws change to either condone or just ignore activities like this. I feel like if we did we’d see more good things happening.

marricks 3y ago

Growing public fruit trees, handing out food, stopping to help an injured person, all of those are illegal in some jurisdictions or can get you into serious legal trouble. That is because laws exist not just to stop bad things but also to stop good things from happening, or at least centralize how good things are done. I mean, otherwise what would happen? We’d all probably just take care of each other, and we can’t have that happening.

throwawayadvsec 3y ago
"stopping to help an injured person," can you be more specific please? where and in which case?
- jagged-chisel 3y ago
  Being held liable for attempting to help but making things worse.
- whynotmaybe 3y ago
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law
  - NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
    You know, one aspect that doesn't appear to be covered in that article is scams. There are often scams perpetrated where someone fakes injury or accident, either to create a diversion, or to attract wannabe "Good Samaritans" who come to render assistance and then find themselves pickpocketed or in worse trouble than they started out. There are also people who pretend to be out of gas and just need a can filled at the local service station. A guy came up to me at a train station and showed me all his sores, and I offered to take him to the drugstore and purchase some bandages, but the only reason he was showing me sores was because he was a panhandler and he wanted cash. I stay away from anyone who looks like they require assistance. Life is too short. I am not a professional first responder and it's not my job to diagnose or treat any illness or injury. I may call 911 if I see something unambiguously egregious, but nowadays, there are usually so many witnesses carrying mobile phones that I don't need to bother.
    - throwaway92700 3y ago
      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect
      - NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
        Thanks for the commentary-free Wikipedia article link, but in skimming across it, I don't see any significant mention of the cases I discussed which are scammers who are faking it. The article chiefly seems to be concerned with real, or perceived real, emergencies, and how they relate to large crowds of witnesses. If is often the case that scammers who are faking distress will isolate and approach potential victims rather than attract a crowd. Especially with people who lurk outside of grocery stores or some other venue. Once I was approached by an "out of gas" individual at a rather lonely intersection of downtown. There were no other witnesses around, until an official in a uniform vest came to intervene.
    - tudorw 3y ago
      I don't stay away. I frequently get stuck in, calling the police, ambulance and fire services for people, assisting epileptics in shops and planes, helping lost children, picking up random dogs and returning them to their owners... Why do you think life is too short, I've always thought it the perfect length, do divulge what it is that takes the time for you?
      - NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
        I suppose you're just the epitome of a good samaritan in the right place at the right time. None of that stuff happens to me. How would I assist an epileptic, or a lost child, in a way that could not be better done by a professional who is trained and commissioned to do such things? I would do more harm than good, me, a stranger in a big city, putting my nose in where it doesn't belong. Especially with minor children. That's unthinkable--where are their parents? If I found a minor without her parents then I would contact authorities, not try to place myself at risk, because whatever separated her from her parents, must be bad news. I do charitable works through the organizations where I am a member. I assist in humanitarian missions in an organized way, not as a stranger on the street with a mobile phone. My life is too short to get caught up in strangers' drama, because that will definitely shorten my life, and possibly also drain my pocketbook, place marks on my criminal record, or indeed put my own self at risk of injury. The cost is too great and there is no reward for random involvement like that. As I said, it usually turns out to be a scam anyway.
  - kneebonian 3y ago
    This law specifically states that you cannot be held legally liable for rendering aid. Not that it is against the law to help people.
    - Moomoomoo309 3y ago
      It covers it in specific cases for specific people. If you help someone not in those specific cases and/or are not that specific kind of person, you can be punished for it.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
NegativeK 3y ago
That's a hyperbolic and rhetorical interpretation of what's going on with this patching.
- marricks 3y ago
  I'm replying to the comment not the article.
jon-wood 3y ago
In all of those cases I’m pretty sure you can’t in fact be arrested just for the act as described. You need to be in some way negligent or malicious in doing so, and in most countries at least you have to be extremely negligent to get prosecuted for anything done while rendering aid to an injured person. Even more generally, some form of harm needs to be shown to prosecute. Unfortunately there’s an increasingly broad definition of “harm”, at least here in the UK, but for now you do have to really screw up in any of the cases you’ve listed.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago

> I feel like if we did we’d see more good things happening. The problem is that we'd see more bad things happening. This time someone correctly patched the devices, but maybe next time they make a mistake and leave things more vulnerable, and the next time someone just bricks devices outright because they decide that's better than vulnerable devices on the open internet.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

neilv 3y ago

Someone who decides to mess non-consensually with 100,000 other people's network routers... Maybe it's a bit like the saying about politicians: you don't want anyone who would want the job.

boomboomsubban 3y ago

While it may be possible for this person to face criminal charges, I doubt any police force or attorney general would really want to investigate or charge this person. And a civil case would require the claimant to prove damages, which they'd struggle to do. So aren't we already at a point where this is condoned/ignored?

thephyber 3y ago
Perhaps for one person doing it a few times and competently patching systems. What happens when a more novice grey hat tries it and bricks the machines? What happens if they patch the routers with software patches that have embedded malware? Ultimately, patching systems on the internet means you are very likely crossing jurisdictional boundaries, so beware what governments you might piss off. Personally, I like that prosecutors in the US are ethically bound to understand why the suspect did what they did (their intentions/motivations) and that prosecutors have the duty to prosecute only cases that they can convince juries to convict on. More than that, prosecutors rarely have lots of spare cycles, so they have to plan+choose their prosecution resources judiciously. And then civil liability is very different from criminal prosecution.
- boomboomsubban 3y ago
  >What happens when a more novice grey hat tries it and bricks the machines? What happens if they patch the routers with software patches that have embedded malware? Then a civil claim could show damages, or there would be some amount of motivation for the state to go after them.

Barrin92 3y ago

Belgium did just that a few months ago: https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/en/2023/02/15/ethical-hackers-can-now-legally-hack-belgian-companies/ https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/en/2023/02/15/ethical-hackers-can-...