4 ms·

I think there are multiple levels here. I agree the law side is a challenge, right now, but as we see new harm arise from new technologies we need to start figu

I think there are multiple levels here. I agree the law side is a challenge, right now, but as we see new harm arise from new technologies we need to start figuring out those lines and figuring out how as a society we discourage this behavior. Basically, I think this is an example of technology moving faster than society's ability to assimilate it and we need to think of smart ways to catch up. That isn't a call to stop technology, but I do think we need to start growing social antibodies to this type of thing. Consider a comparison to kids vandalizing things. As a society we frown on vandalism even without laws in place forbidding it. At many turns in society kids are discouraged from doing it and most, but not all, grow up knowing they shouldn't do it. Social pressure is there to help keep it in check and that also leads to a better understanding of 'the line' which helps inform more formal things like laws and punishments. Laws, and law enforcement, should come after society has taken notice and started acting so how do we get society noticing and acting? What should society do? I think it is, possibly, partly things like emphasizing the idea that it isn't 'cool' to hack things, which every movie in existence does. I admit that isn't a strong start to the idea thread, but there may be things along those lines that could help.

_heimdall 2y ago
You and I definitely have the same moral view of hacking, or "offensive hacking" if blackhat hacking isn't a term today? I'm always very hesitant to see any top-down changes trying to change public sentiment though, whether by some kind of intervention to change norms or through law. Norms and laws should reflect, rather than coerce, public opinion. If a majority of people would, of their own accord, agree that hitting common API endpoints on servers publicly connected to the internet is too dangerous to be allowed, I guess we could try to draw a line between that and hacking or penetration testing with good intent. Short of that though, is it really our place to convince people that this is wrong? Sure we can absolutely do a better job of raising awareness of what's going on, but at least to me awareness of the facts should be the extent of it. People can make up their own decisions on whether or not something is okay, or if its bad enough that we need to further empower the government to enforce more laws.

_heimdall 2y ago

You and I definitely have the same moral view of hacking, or "offensive hacking" if blackhat hacking isn't a term today? I'm always very hesitant to see any top-down changes trying to change public sentiment though, whether by some kind of intervention to change norms or through law. Norms and laws should reflect, rather than coerce, public opinion. If a majority of people would, of their own accord, agree that hitting common API endpoints on servers publicly connected to the internet is too dangerous to be allowed, I guess we could try to draw a line between that and hacking or penetration testing with good intent. Short of that though, is it really our place to convince people that this is wrong? Sure we can absolutely do a better job of raising awareness of what's going on, but at least to me awareness of the facts should be the extent of it. People can make up their own decisions on whether or not something is okay, or if its bad enough that we need to further empower the government to enforce more laws.