5 ms·
It was an interesting manipulation of the system, but as pointed out it's a dangerous slope. A community based on trust will sour very quickly if a lot of these
by sgrove 18y ago
It was an interesting manipulation of the system, but as pointed out it's a dangerous slope. A community based on trust will sour very quickly if a lot of these tricks pop up.
Sharing the trick is entirely reasonable: small hacks like this are something to be proud of, given that you've acted in a reasonable way (e.g. contacted the site and informed them before telling others, not actually using it game the system, etc.)
Could have gone that way. Didn't.
- erlanger 18y agoHackers should know how to secure their own website. Between this and the JS injection hack (from the same fellow), it's clear that security is porous at best.
- bad_user 18y agoAs a kid I never understood why some of the kinds made it a hobby to trash the sandcastles built by the others. It was an interesting phenomenon to watch :) Maybe they thought that if they wanted to, they can do better, but they never did.
- erlanger 18y agoOr maybe it's a cop-out to say that you didn't care about your sand castle's security in the first place. If you knew of a way to keep it from getting knocked over, you'd use it.
- run4yourlives 18y agoBeing an asshole is just that - being an asshole. It doesn't really involve anyone else.
- unalone 18y agoKnow who knocks over a sand castle? A dick. I'm sick of security. I wish we could make things without worrying about the myriad ways there are to destroy a thing? What did xach have to gain by doing this experiment that he would have lost by emailing PG quietly, beyond the childish feeling of destroying a good thing?
- tptacek 18y agoWhere do you work, erlanger? Let's have a look.
- dha 18y agoWhat? It's bad for security bugs to be exposed to the public rather than to have people silently exploit them?