7 ms·
Terrible advice to pull a media stunt. First, you have no idea what the manufacturer needs to do to fix the problem, alert customers, do recalls and recertific
by jph 12y ago
Terrible advice to pull a media stunt.
First, you have no idea what the manufacturer needs to do to fix the problem, alert customers, do recalls and recertifications, and the like.
Second, you put yourself directly in the line of fire unnecessarily and for all the wrong reasons. You could find yourself on the end of all kinds of legal trouble, and on top of that you would be morally culpable for any harm.
Do it the right way: get a lawyer. The lawyer will know how to contact the vendors, the regulatory agencies, media if necessary, and customers if necessary.
- kennywinker 12y agoI think OP is suggesting reveal the effect, but don't reveal the cause. That's what makes the suggestion different from releasing an 0day
- chime 12y agoIf it's as easy as using 'strings', then isn't that no different than releasing a 0day?
- 6d0debc071 12y agoIf it's that simple he or she has, in effect, already released it.
- polarix 12y agoAnd who pays the lawyer?
- aaronbrethorst 12y agoI expect that any savvy lawyer would be happy to take this pro bono. Think of how much free publicity they'd get for their practice.
- eps 12y agoAh, excellent plan. That's a variation of a good old "you should write us an app / design a logo / sketch a website for free, just for all the exposure you get".
- baddox 12y agoI see a lot of people on the Internet implying that there are plenty of lawyers just sitting around waiting for interesting and potentially high profile cases to take on for free. I've never seen any evidence of this, and I suspect there are very few.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- aaronbrethorst 12y agohttp://www2.nycbar.org/mp3/DoingWellByDoingGood/pbi_businesscase.pdf http://www2.nycbar.org/mp3/DoingWellByDoingGood/pbi_business... Major pro bono matters, or smaller cases with great human interest, are far more likely to receive extensive coverage. Holland & Knight, for example, received highly favorable and extensive coverage of its work in the Rosewood case, including a glowing front page, above the fold, article in the Wall Street Journal and People. Hogan & Hartson, similarly, received a great deal of play in the media concerning its representation of African-American plaintiffs alleging that Denny’s restaurants had discriminated against them. In both instances, the firms undertook these time-consuming, controversial cases because it was the right thing to do. However, their creative, successful lawyering became a front-page story.
- mindslight 12y ago> get a lawyer Because this is the world we should want to live in? Where you must pay a member of the protection racket to mediate publishing knowledge of someone else's extreme wrongdoing? That is terrible advice. Its road ends with TORified disclosures of weaponized automated exploits, because as pure info sec has shown, that's the only way the message ever gets across when you give people the insulation to not listen. Publicly demonstrating these exploits to an amicable media is the best idea I've heard yet, as they have straightforward real-world effects that can be easily illustrated. If certain manufacturers choose to send goons after you rather than fix their buggy products, then the community-accepted custom for them can change to psuedonymous press releases accompanied by a video with a (mock) live human subject.
- ijk 12y ago> Because this is the world we should want to live in? Where you must pay a member of the protection racket to mediate publishing knowledge of someone else's extreme wrongdoing? Might be useful to distinguish between the ideal and the actual: in an ideal world, you of course shouldn't need a lawyer and the manufacturers should smilingly thank anyone who discovers an exploit and tells them. In this less-than-perfect world I'd suggest getting a lawyer and then going to the media.
- sliverstorm 12y agoMaybe if we just wish harder...
- tripzilch 12y agoInteresting how digital rights, when they apply to privacy and outrage about eavesdropping it's "just the USA", but when they refer to liability in an out-of-control justice system it's as if does work the same way in the entire world.
- thenmar 12y agoCan you elaborate on how lawyers are "member[s] of the protection racket"?
- ossreality 12y agoOh fucking yawn, this is absurd advice. Can you even be serious?
- elwell 12y ago> you would be morally culpable for any harm Guns don't kill people...
- hrktb 12y agoI wonder if a lawyer really caring about his client wouldn't straight up say "just forget about it". If the company you're criticising doesn't like critics, doesn't care about bad PR, and has to feed their lawyers, you won't have a good time any way you do it. Some rare occasions you might be better off with a strong public opinion supporting you and people coming out of the bush to help your case, than trying to do it the sneaky way and still get caught in a hell of legal troubles that not much people really heard of, and you get cast as the little guy trying too pull money from the big corp because of the narrative sold to the media by your opponent.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]