Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by richardwhiuk 4187 days ago
Personally (and I know this is likely to be an unpopular sentiment on HN) I have very little sympathy for weev.

He knowingly and deliberately attack a weakness he had found to scrape data, knowing that the access was unauthorized. I disagree that the data was in the public domain (although the Third Circuit disagrees) - just because something is accessible to the public doesn't mean it's in the public domain.

Just because he wrote it up as a security researcher doesn't mean he should be immune for his actions - in fact in some ways it makes it worse because he did it knowing that he was unauthorized.

He exposed the vulnerability to the press (so he didn't act in good faith regarding the disclosue) and he did so potentially for monetary gain (he claimed to be a member of a hacker group called “the organization,” making $10 million annually).

I think one part of improving cyber security is prosecuting people who deliberately and maliciously hack into other systems who do so for either monetary gain or fame. I think this is especially the case whereby they don't act in good faith (e.g. providing proper disclosure).

3 comments

>I think one part of improving cyber security is prosecuting people who deliberately and maliciously hack into other systems who do so for either monetary gain or fame.

This would do nothing except cast a chilling effect over the security community. Everyone would sit on exploits, too afraid of overzealous prosecutors to publish them or even reach out to the affected parties.

Unless, of course, you believe the US justice system to be the paragon of restraint and reasonableness.

No, it would be better if responsible disclosure was codified in the CFA. That's worthy of a campaign - but weev didn't practice that, so he's a poor figurehead for such a campaign.

Such a protection could provide an equal level of footing with the DMCA (i.e. you aren't liable for malicious attacks on a computer company if you provide full disclosue and advance notice, in the same way YouTube isn't liable for hosting copyrighted content if they provide a takedown mechanism).

Doubt it's as unpopular as you think.
Apparently - probably because of a silent majority instead of a vocal minority.
I agree, and feel that the EFF made quite the strategic error in supporting Auernheimer's appeal.
Weev should probably be in jail for several reasons. Just not the specific reason they sent him to jail for. The EFF had to fight because the conviction set a really bad precedent for other research.
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.

— H. L. Mencken

> "For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed..."

[Citation Needed]