Re: Weev's collateral damage.

[Ali-Reza Anghaie <ali () packetknife com>]

The problem is that the ~context~ rarely follows the (now) precedent that
gets established. That's why issues of over-criminalization are even hard
to tackle.

Not to mention any of the previously mentioned difficulties of
(effectively) an adversary w/ unlimited resources that can "legally"
handicap you up-front and a jury that is predisposed to convict.

It's even more unfortunate that such a polarizing character is involved.

Anyhow... Happy Thanksgiving to my US friends. Be well, -Ali



On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Kristian Erik Hermansen <
kristian.hermansen () gmail com> wrote:

> On Nov 21, 2012 9:08 AM, "Dave Aitel" <dave () immunityinc com> wrote:
> > It's obvious to anyone with any technical background that the case the
> FBI brought against him is a travesty, and the fact that they won is even
> more insane. It's this sort of thing that makes it obvious the DHS doesn't
> understand the Internet, and shouldn't be given more control over
>
> I agree generally, but the evidence is pretty clear:
>
> "Auernheimer admitted conducting the breach to tarnish AT&T’s reputation"
>
> This seems preconceived and an attempt to defame ATT. Those two facts
> alone seem to constitute enough for legal action following the script
> probes, but I am also not a lawyer. ATT doesn't seem to have a get out of
> jail free card for security folk testing for weaknesses. All combined, you
> go to jail when someone snitches on you.
>
> I also had words with weev five years ago. He is definitely a troll to
> anyone that knows him, so the story hits home. He has done much worse than
> what this breach brought to light, as you point out.
>
> I am also still troubled by the outcome of course because the "hack" is
> really just twiddling some integers (direct object reference), which works
> on 99% of websites today to "breach" private data. I would bet lots of
> people on this lost have probably done the same and are not in jail. Then
> again, we probably didn't chat about it for hours and attempt to defame a
> corporation. We are mostly white hats here right? Maybe only a slight tint
> of gray? ;)
>
> Happy thanksgiving!
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dailydave mailing list
> Dailydave () lists immunityinc com
> https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
_______________________________________________
Dailydave mailing list
Dailydave () lists immunityinc com
https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave