His job was to debug the program though, so wouldn't that literally be all about poking around holes? His job was to solve a problem with a database's log file

His job was to debug the program though, so wouldn't that literally be all about poking around holes? His job was to solve a problem with a database's log files. He found another second database. "Maybe this second database is causing duplicate log files?" so he goes in and looks. It makes sense to me. Based on the german article: (machine translated to english) > The software of Modern Solution had a database of the defendant's customer "fully littered with log reports," says the defence lawyer. His client was then given the order from his customer to solve this problem. > The defendant then determined that the software from Modern Solution established a MySQL connection over the Internet to the servers of the Gladbeck company. ...the defendant has first assumed that the software on his customer's server will connect to a Modem Solution database that was only intended for his customer and contained only his data. From the read-out database name, this sounded quite plausible. > However, the defendant quickly discovered that the corresponding database contained much more information. It later turned out that the data here was included Modern Solutions customers and from all end customers whose online shops were included. According to his own statement, the defendant had directly separated the database connection when he discovered that he had access to other customers' data. > the programmer contacted the affected company with the help of a tech blogger, which then closed the security gap and displayed the programmer at the police.