4 ms·

Downloading it wasn’t really the problem, though. I agree that pentesters should be able to. But redistributing a police database (even just to reporters) is o

Downloading it wasn’t really the problem, though. I agree that pentesters should be able to. But redistributing a police database (even just to reporters) is obviously going to cause the city to file a restraining order to stop further distribution. Especially when he said he plans to make a site that would share details related to that database. If nothing else, it was probably a bad idea to do what he did. I was only trying to caution overeager outsiders against doing similar things. What do you make of all this? The lawsuit itself seems dubious, even if the restraining order made sense.

rockskon 2y ago
My understanding is that there generally isn't a legal prohibiton on disseminating data you obtained legally even if the person who initially acquired it did so illegally.
- cortesoft 2y ago
  I think it wouldn't be a crime, but you could still be sued to get you to stop distributing it.
  - rockskon 2y ago
    Sued under what grounds? "Cause we don't want you to" isn't valid legal grounds.
sigseg1v 2y ago
Agreed. I think something people are getting hung up on here is that just because something is technically public, doesn't mean you can assist in distributing it. Example: Controlled drugs are public in that you can easily go to a certain area in downtown and obtain them. However, if you do so, and then you start distributing it yourself, you will be charged with a crime. Nobody has issues understanding this but they seem to have issues understanding when it's data instead of physical goods for some reason.
- whycome 2y ago
  The city says it doesn't distribute illegal drugs. He knows they're lying. He goes to a dealer and gets the drugs that are in official city packaging and gives it to reporters.
tptacek 2y ago
I haven't thought about it too much. I feel like taking stolen data from a Tor BBS and amplifying its harms to make a political point is going to put you on shaky legal ground, and past that I don't have a take on whether you should ultimately prevail. There does reach a point where a government can't sit back and say "yeah, yeah, you got us" while someone posts, like, the list of police CIs.

rockskon 2y ago

My understanding is that there generally isn't a legal prohibiton on disseminating data you obtained legally even if the person who initially acquired it did so illegally.

cortesoft 2y ago
I think it wouldn't be a crime, but you could still be sued to get you to stop distributing it.
- rockskon 2y ago
  Sued under what grounds? "Cause we don't want you to" isn't valid legal grounds.

sigseg1v 2y ago

Agreed. I think something people are getting hung up on here is that just because something is technically public, doesn't mean you can assist in distributing it. Example: Controlled drugs are public in that you can easily go to a certain area in downtown and obtain them. However, if you do so, and then you start distributing it yourself, you will be charged with a crime. Nobody has issues understanding this but they seem to have issues understanding when it's data instead of physical goods for some reason.

whycome 2y ago
The city says it doesn't distribute illegal drugs. He knows they're lying. He goes to a dealer and gets the drugs that are in official city packaging and gives it to reporters.

tptacek 2y ago

I haven't thought about it too much. I feel like taking stolen data from a Tor BBS and amplifying its harms to make a political point is going to put you on shaky legal ground, and past that I don't have a take on whether you should ultimately prevail. There does reach a point where a government can't sit back and say "yeah, yeah, you got us" while someone posts, like, the list of police CIs.