Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
1483 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 121

Subscriber

Reply # 1110029 17-Aug-2014 18:49
One person supports this post
Send private message

not hacking and not backdoor as Cunliffe said. TV1 news tonight Cunliffe said National went through a back door. His own words.  Labour left the front door open.  Was it right for National or anyone to take advantage of it ?   To me THAT is the question.   Personally I dont think it was right to take advantage. Labour made a mistake and it should have been made aware of the problem not taken advantage of.  I dont know if it was legal to take advantage as I am no lawyer.  I do think it was ethically and morally wrong.




HTPC Intel Pentium G3258 cpu, Gigabyte H97n-wifi motherboard, , 8GB DDR3 ram, onboard  graphics. Hauppuage HVR 5500 tuner,  Silverstone LC16M case, Windows 10 pro 64 bit using Nextpvr and Kodi


17574 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5058

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1110031 17-Aug-2014 18:51
2 people support this post
Send private message

sir1963:
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...




Heh, ok fella, calm yourself down. I never once mentioned rape and conclusions you have drawn to the same are incredibly offensive to me.

I think there is a difference between stuff being accessible by a rank amateur due to gross incompetence and requiring special tools and skills to obtain information. 

BDFL - Memuneh
61016 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 11849

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1110046 17-Aug-2014 19:20
Send private message

As above. One thing is having the door unlocked  and someone taking advantage (webserver incorrectly configured exposing file system) the other thing is someone picking a lock to get through the door (using a XSS or SQL injection to get the information that would otherwise be hidden from plain view).





54 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 26


  Reply # 1110047 17-Aug-2014 19:24
One person supports this post
Send private message

This goes back to the WINZ issue a year or two ago, what was the governments tone then?

BDFL - Memuneh
61016 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 11849

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1110049 17-Aug-2014 19:29
2 people support this post
Send private message

Of course there are many definitions of "hacking". One is the skills people use to develop programs (as in "hacking code" and "hacktons). The other applies to people who deeply understand how a system work and are capable of using it to the max (legal or illegal, for example phreaking). And lastly the one that is the mainstream (even though I don't agree) is someone using tricks, social engineering, system exploits to illegal access data.

Under these definitions, yes it was a hack. But I wouldn't classify it as a high end hacking - no deep exploits required, no social engineering applied to steal someone's password, no keylogger installed, etc.

So, it can sway both ways here.





798 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 355


  Reply # 1110072 17-Aug-2014 19:56
One person supports this post
Send private message

networkn:
sir1963:
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...




Heh, ok fella, calm yourself down. I never once mentioned rape and conclusions you have drawn to the same are incredibly offensive to me.

I think there is a difference between stuff being accessible by a rank amateur due to gross incompetence and requiring special tools and skills to obtain information. 


My point being as soon as you need to blame the victim to justify what has been done, you have automatically put yourself in the wrong.
There was no call for National or its supporters to be there, and even less for them to exploit a flaw in security. Honest people don't do this.
Equally I object to anyone getting at Cameron Slaters information.

I was bought up to know the difference between right and wrong

17574 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5058

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1110095 17-Aug-2014 20:19
Send private message

sir1963:
networkn:
sir1963:
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...




Heh, ok fella, calm yourself down. I never once mentioned rape and conclusions you have drawn to the same are incredibly offensive to me.

I think there is a difference between stuff being accessible by a rank amateur due to gross incompetence and requiring special tools and skills to obtain information. 


My point being as soon as you need to blame the victim to justify what has been done, you have automatically put yourself in the wrong.
There was no call for National or its supporters to be there, and even less for them to exploit a flaw in security. Honest people don't do this.
Equally I object to anyone getting at Cameron Slaters information.

I was bought up to know the difference between right and wrong


I am not doing that, it's a side fact to the issue. The "facts" aren't concrete in my eyes at this stage, and I am unsure the truth will ever really come out. 

509 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 155
Inactive user


  Reply # 1110100 17-Aug-2014 20:31
Send private message

The big issue is not the hacking, it's the blackmail.
Clearly those talking about the hacking issues, like the media, have not read the book.


BDFL - Memuneh
61016 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 11849

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1110101 17-Aug-2014 20:33
One person supports this post
Send private message

As pointed out, this "hacking" in the OP is from 2011. If people want to discuss the new book Dirty Politics, please use the existing thread.




2860 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 683

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1110102 17-Aug-2014 20:33
Send private message

sir1963:
networkn:
sir1963:
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...




Heh, ok fella, calm yourself down. I never once mentioned rape and conclusions you have drawn to the same are incredibly offensive to me.

I think there is a difference between stuff being accessible by a rank amateur due to gross incompetence and requiring special tools and skills to obtain information. 


My point being as soon as you need to blame the victim to justify what has been done, you have automatically put yourself in the wrong.
There was no call for National or its supporters to be there, and even less for them to exploit a flaw in security. Honest people don't do this.
Equally I object to anyone getting at Cameron Slaters information.

I was bought up to know the difference between right and wrong


I think your post belongs more in the other thread, honestly its about whether it is hacking or not regardless of where people want to drag it. Personally I think its not hacking in the wider sense of the term but under current NZ law is it illegal? 




Galaxy S8

 

Garmin  Vivoactive 3






258 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 11


  Reply # 1110103 17-Aug-2014 20:35
One person supports this post
Send private message

My main point for starting this post was more around everyone saying the site was 'hacked' when it wasn't really?

I was looking more on the technical side than all this Hagar/WhaleOil/blackmail drama.

2384 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 799

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1110104 17-Aug-2014 20:43
5 people support this post
Send private message

IANAL but I think it's pretty clear cut in the crimes act.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2003/0039/latest/whole.html#DLM200269

Or

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2003/0039/latest/whole.html#DLM200273

It wasn't hacking, but it wasn't accessing a computer for honest purposes or was authorised either.





5130 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1071

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1110115 17-Aug-2014 20:58
Send private message

freitasm: Bringing back some stuff from 2011?

Sure, there was no "hacking" (if you define hacking as using exploits, social engineering) 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?


A better analogy would be: 

If someone leaves their TV on in the lounge and the curtains open...it is ethically OK to stand on the footpath out front with a pair of binoculars and watch the TV? You're intruding by looking at it....but they are making the content clearly visible to any passer by. 




____________________________________________________
I'm on a high fibre diet. 

 

High fibre diet


JWR

738 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 236


  Reply # 1110142 17-Aug-2014 21:50

freitasm:

 

Of course there are many definitions of "hacking". One is the skills people use to develop programs (as in "hacking code" and "hacktons). The other applies to people who deeply understand how a system work and are capable of using it to the max (legal or illegal, for example phreaking). And lastly the one that is the mainstream (even though I don't agree) is someone using tricks, social engineering, system exploits to illegal access data.

Under these definitions, yes it was a hack. But I wouldn't classify it as a high end hacking - no deep exploits required, no social engineering applied to steal someone's password, no keylogger installed, etc.

So, it can sway both ways here.

 



I think the term 'Hacking' is meaningless now.

I would call it exploiting a security vulnerability.

The discovery of the vulnerability isn't the issue. It is what was done with the knowledge.

Also, too many analogies in this thread.

Analogy, is used to simplify something for easier understanding and not used to turn it into something else.

Too much something else.

14205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1826


  Reply # 1110170 17-Aug-2014 22:11
Send private message

JWR:
freitasm: Of course there are many definitions of "hacking". One is the skills people use to develop programs (as in "hacking code" and "hacktons). The other applies to people who deeply understand how a system work and are capable of using it to the max (legal or illegal, for example phreaking). And lastly the one that is the mainstream (even though I don't agree) is someone using tricks, social engineering, system exploits to illegal access data.

Under these definitions, yes it was a hack. But I wouldn't classify it as a high end hacking - no deep exploits required, no social engineering applied to steal someone's password, no keylogger installed, etc.

So, it can sway both ways here.



I think the term 'Hacking' is meaningless now.

I would call it exploiting a security vulnerability.

The discovery of the vulnerability isn't the issue. It is what was done with the knowledge.

Also, too many analogies in this thread.

Analogy, is used to simplify something for easier understanding and not used to turn it into something else.

Too much something else.


Wouldn't anyone who is 'exploiting a security vulnerability', be something illegal?  The keyword is 'Exploiting', which means 'to derive benefit from'.
Compare this to a house where a door has a faulty lock on it, where it doesn't lock. So even though the owner thinks they locked their front door, it doesn't mean that you can then go up to their house open the door and access their house, just because the door wasn't locked. Analogies are needed due to the medium, and in court they would also use analogies to get a clear understanding.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Intel introduces new NUC kits and NUC mini PCs
Posted 16-Aug-2018 11:03


The Warehouse leaps into the AI future with Google
Posted 15-Aug-2018 17:56


Targus set sights on enterprise and consumer growth in New Zealand
Posted 13-Aug-2018 13:47


Huawei to distribute nova 3i in New Zealand
Posted 9-Aug-2018 16:23


Home robot Vector to be available in New Zealand stores
Posted 9-Aug-2018 14:47


Panasonic announces new 2018 OLED TV line up
Posted 7-Aug-2018 16:38


Kordia completes first live 4K TV broadcast
Posted 1-Aug-2018 13:00


Schools get safer and smarter internet with Managed Network Upgrade
Posted 30-Jul-2018 20:01


DNC wants a safer .nz in the coming year
Posted 26-Jul-2018 16:08


Auldhouse becomes an AWS Authorised Training Delivery Partner in New Zealand
Posted 26-Jul-2018 15:55


Rakuten Kobo launches Kobo Clara HD entry level reader
Posted 26-Jul-2018 15:44


Kiwi team reaches semi-finals at the Microsoft Imagine Cup
Posted 26-Jul-2018 15:38


KidsCan App to Help Kiwi Children in Need
Posted 26-Jul-2018 15:32


FUJIFILM announces new high-performance lenses
Posted 24-Jul-2018 14:57


New FUJIFILM XF10 introduces square mode for Instagram sharing
Posted 24-Jul-2018 14:44



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.