3 ms·

After reading the text I predict this is completely sensationalised and that something worse happened.

• z500 3y ago
  According to the linked heise.de article the defendant assumed the credentials were for a database that only contained his client's data, and immediately disconnected as soon as he realized he was actually seeing data for all of the complainant's clients.
• pgeorgi 3y ago
  It's a lowest level court, they're known to have wildly absurd legal opinions at times. Having stupid laws on the book (like the one in question) doesn't help. The curious bit is that this law is from 2007, so apparently this is an angle that escaped all attorney and courts who applied this law in 16.5 years, or the defense could have shot down this line of reasoning by pointing out that this isn't what the law intended. (we don't have case law, but there are means of harmonizing outcomes once stuff ended up at higher level courts) My guess is that this won't hold up for long given the circumstances (trivially got the password, accidentally gained more access than expected, immediately disconnected upon notice)
  • cybrox 3y ago
    I've been following this for a long while now, as I frequent one of the forums that this person is also active on. Even if the sentence is overturned by a higher instance, the confiscation of all devices for months and the additional legal trouble have made pretty sure that this person will not make the same "mistake" again. The company's public statements during the whole affair were another story entirely. For these alone they'd deserve the next guy to just sell the credentials on a forum and have them blow up.