It was hardly 'hacking' was it?

Forums › Off topic › It was hardly 'hacking' was it?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

17159 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1109953 17-Aug-2014 14:52

Lias: If you are stupid enough to leave something configured in such a way that it can be indexed by google, and crawled by the wayback machine, it's not a hack, or an intrusion. I strongly dislike Whaleoil but Labour was criminally incompetent here.

http://web.archive.org/web/20110611064650/http://healthyhomeshealthykiwis.org.nz/production/sites/drupal_labour/current/files/

There is no doubt of that. But the Labour accusations of 'hacking' and 'intrusion' are not aimed at Whaleoil at all. They are aimed at an undisclosed National Party staff member that Labour claim also had this information related to a dynamic IP address originally unknown.

nakedmolerat

4629 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1109956 17-Aug-2014 14:59

astrae:

But its OK to make money off a book from content that was actually hacked and stolen?

Sorry, how this is related to the topic?

gzt

17159 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1109962 17-Aug-2014 15:06

Both are good questions. I would prefer that discussion is taken to the wider discussion topic about the Hager book.

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1109976 17-Aug-2014 15:32

so back to topic what is the legal standing on this, is it hacking or not

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

sir1963

3265 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1109979 17-Aug-2014 16:17

Lias: If you are stupid enough to leave something configured in such a way that it can be indexed by google, and crawled by the wayback machine, it's not a hack, or an intrusion. I strongly dislike Whaleoil but Labour was criminally incompetent here.

http://web.archive.org/web/20110611064650/http://healthyhomeshealthykiwis.org.nz/production/sites/drupal_labour/current/files/

Yeah, thats right up there with "If you are stupid enough to loose your wallet then its OK if someone removes the money, credit cards etc"

I would guess you find it OK that vulnerable older people to be ripped off too, after all if they are that stupid......

Me, I prefer people to take the moral high ground and know that right and wrong is right and wrong no matter who wins or whom the victim is.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79310 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#1109982 17-Aug-2014 16:43

andrewNZ:
freitasm: Bringing back some stuff from 2011?

Sure, there was no "hacking" (whatever is the definition you have) back then as because of a badly configured web server some content was visible in plain sight. But was it ok to grab it?

If you leave your house unlocked and someone walks in, is it ok for your TV to be gone?

My comment is not specifically aimed at WhaleOil but it is a general question. If YOU go to a website and by chance it's not serving the pages but showing a directory would you grab credit card numbers if available and start using them?

Also perhaps this video would be better posted in the Dirty Politics book discussion going on now?

Not sure I agree with your analogy.

This is more like inviting stacks of people into your home, and leaving your nudey wife photo album on the bookshelf.
There is a reasonable chance someone will look, and it's your own fault for leaving it there.

Should they take copies, no. But they probably will.

Your analogy is exactly the same as mine, with a different situation.

mattwnz

20169 posts

Uber Geek

#1109983 17-Aug-2014 16:47

Dingbatt: Interesting analogies MF. I would like to know an insurance company's response when you made a claim for the missing TV if you admitted you left the house unlocked, and the credit card one becomes fraud when you use the information gained for personal gain.
Just another example of the brave new world that is the internet, and the difficulty lawmakers have keeping up.

I believe if you leave the house unlocked, you may not be covered by insurance, as you didn't take all precautions to protect your goods. May depend on insurer though, and whetehr you can prove if it was a genuine error. Pretty hard though for both parties.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79310 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#1109984 17-Aug-2014 16:49

mattwnz:
Dingbatt: Interesting analogies MF. I would like to know an insurance company's response when you made a claim for the missing TV if you admitted you left the house unlocked, and the credit card one becomes fraud when you use the information gained for personal gain.
Just another example of the brave new world that is the internet, and the difficulty lawmakers have keeping up.

I believe if you leave the house unlocked, you may not be covered by insurance, as you didn't take all precautions to protect your goods. May depend on insurer though, and whetehr you can prove if it was a genuine error. Pretty hard though for both parties.

I still don't see why trying to make a comparison to an insurance claim. The similarities in my example end at someone taking something away from an "unlock" (online or real) property.

No one is claiming insurance in my example.

In real life insurance companies will probably try to get away from paying by saying you didn't take the right precautions to keep your items safe.

mattwnz

20169 posts

Uber Geek

#1109985 17-Aug-2014 16:56

freitasm:
mattwnz:
Dingbatt: Interesting analogies MF. I would like to know an insurance company's response when you made a claim for the missing TV if you admitted you left the house unlocked, and the credit card one becomes fraud when you use the information gained for personal gain.
Just another example of the brave new world that is the internet, and the difficulty lawmakers have keeping up.

I believe if you leave the house unlocked, you may not be covered by insurance, as you didn't take all precautions to protect your goods. May depend on insurer though, and whetehr you can prove if it was a genuine error. Pretty hard though for both parties.

I still don't see why trying to make a comparison to an insurance claim. The similarities in my example end at someone taking something away from an "unlock" (online or real) property.

No one is claiming insurance in my example.

In real life insurance companies will probably try to get away from paying by saying you didn't take the right precautions to keep your items safe.

I guess the analogy is with a door being closed, would be somewhat similar to webpages not being directly linked on a website, but they are still accessible if you know the URL, or can generate a directory and file listing on the server. A locked door would be similar to those same pages being behind some form of password protection.

nate

6473 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1109987 17-Aug-2014 17:24

jeffnz: so back to topic what is the legal standing on this, is it hacking or not

I don't think so.

Why aren't Labour jumping up and down at the staff member/contractor that didn't secure their web server correctly?

mattwnz

20169 posts

Uber Geek

#1109990 17-Aug-2014 17:31

nate:
jeffnz: so back to topic what is the legal standing on this, is it hacking or not

I don't think so.

Why aren't Labour jumping up and down at the staff member/contractor that didn't secure their web server correctly?

Are there set standards though on the minimum security standards required. If a website was a wordpress website for example, and it was using an older version that was hacked who would be at fault then. . Although being government I am sure they have got some policy documents regarding it.
Many businesses setup wordpress websites and never get them updated to new versions, as it often involves costs and time

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1109992 17-Aug-2014 17:36

sir1963:
Lias: If you are stupid enough to leave something configured in such a way that it can be indexed by google, and crawled by the wayback machine, it's not a hack, or an intrusion. I strongly dislike Whaleoil but Labour was criminally incompetent here.

http://web.archive.org/web/20110611064650/http://healthyhomeshealthykiwis.org.nz/production/sites/drupal_labour/current/files/

Yeah, thats right up there with "If you are stupid enough to loose your wallet then its OK if someone removes the money, credit cards etc"

I would guess you find it OK that vulnerable older people to be ripped off too, after all if they are that stupid......

Me, I prefer people to take the moral high ground and know that right and wrong is right and wrong no matter who wins or whom the victim is.

the morale high ground isn't being argued its whether it is hacking or not, I think there is another thread for debating the morale rights and wrongs

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

networkn

Networkn
32359 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1109997 17-Aug-2014 17:46

nate:
jeffnz: so back to topic what is the legal standing on this, is it hacking or not

I don't think so.

Why aren't Labour jumping up and down at the staff member/contractor that didn't secure their web server correctly?

Well that's simple. Labours entire premise is based on no requirement for personal responsibility.

sir1963

3265 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1110020 17-Aug-2014 18:38

jeffnz:
sir1963:
Lias: If you are stupid enough to leave something configured in such a way that it can be indexed by google, and crawled by the wayback machine, it's not a hack, or an intrusion. I strongly dislike Whaleoil but Labour was criminally incompetent here.

http://web.archive.org/web/20110611064650/http://healthyhomeshealthykiwis.org.nz/production/sites/drupal_labour/current/files/

Yeah, thats right up there with "If you are stupid enough to loose your wallet then its OK if someone removes the money, credit cards etc"

I would guess you find it OK that vulnerable older people to be ripped off too, after all if they are that stupid......

Me, I prefer people to take the moral high ground and know that right and wrong is right and wrong no matter who wins or whom the victim is.

the morale high ground isn't being argued its whether it is hacking or not, I think there is another thread for debating the morale rights and wrongs

No this is a thread about justifying people doing the wrong thing because it conforms to their political beliefs. These same people would be baying for blood if it had been labour of had done this to national.

ANYONE whose morals are dependant on who the victim is should be ashamed.

sir1963

3265 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1110026 17-Aug-2014 18:46

networkn:
nate:
jeffnz: so back to topic what is the legal standing on this, is it hacking or not

I don't think so.

Why aren't Labour jumping up and down at the staff member/contractor that didn't secure their web server correctly?

Well that's simple. Labours entire premise is based on no requirement for personal responsibility.

Yet another attempt to blame the victim.

You believe girls who get raped are at fault because of what they wear ?

I presume you also believe it is Slaters fault for his stuff being hacked, he too obviously did not employ enough security...

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7