3 ms·

You are right that the public understands rats in restaurants more than they understand insecure web apps. But the public also understands that things visible

You are right that the public understands rats in restaurants more than they understand insecure web apps. But the public also understands that things visible through the front window of a business on a street are not private or secret. (And I know someone is itching to type that AT&T is just a window and they just served up exactly what Weev wanted, but I'm too tired to respond to such nonsense.) "Bringing a serious problem to the public's attention" are not magic words that make someone's actions legal.

mindslight 14y ago
The only people who think weev's actions aren't illegal are people stuck thinking the laws make sense and trying to reconcile them with their morals. The real question is whether what he did is wrong, and if so, what level of punishment is appropriate. I'd say that a list of email addresses isn't actually private information worthy of legal protection. We've just got these ridiculous laws calling widely-available datums "sensitive" because banks (et al) are trying to pretend that your "identity" is somehow being "stolen" rather than that they're simply being defrauded. So a simple trespass with questionable intent has been turned into a several year felony based on these toxic bits that aren't actually important enough to necessitate serious audits or redundant controls. Frankly the highly fucked up part of these laws are the amount of time involved, both what defendants are pressured to plea bargain with, and the actual amounts that get sentenced. It's very easy to say that three years in a cage is reasonable from the comfort of your chair. We can debate what should be ultimately illegal etc, but with these kind of sentences we're basically talking about destroying someone's existing life for a non-violent action with minor damages that a different company wouldn't even press charges for.

mindslight 14y ago

The only people who think weev's actions aren't illegal are people stuck thinking the laws make sense and trying to reconcile them with their morals. The real question is whether what he did is wrong, and if so, what level of punishment is appropriate. I'd say that a list of email addresses isn't actually private information worthy of legal protection. We've just got these ridiculous laws calling widely-available datums "sensitive" because banks (et al) are trying to pretend that your "identity" is somehow being "stolen" rather than that they're simply being defrauded. So a simple trespass with questionable intent has been turned into a several year felony based on these toxic bits that aren't actually important enough to necessitate serious audits or redundant controls. Frankly the highly fucked up part of these laws are the amount of time involved, both what defendants are pressured to plea bargain with, and the actual amounts that get sentenced. It's very easy to say that three years in a cage is reasonable from the comfort of your chair. We can debate what should be ultimately illegal etc, but with these kind of sentences we're basically talking about destroying someone's existing life for a non-violent action with minor damages that a different company wouldn't even press charges for.