Doesn’t matter if a person has a computer with no password at all. If you are on their computer and you are not authorized to use their computer that is a crime.
When I die, my assets should go to the people I named as my beneficiaries. If someone else comes along to try and take ownership of my assets, they should definitely be denied. Also, just because I’m dead doesn’t mean anyone should have access to my devices, especially if password locked. So I would answer both questions with yes.
The account holder violated the contract with the serviceprovider. The “hacker” has no agreement with anyone so they violated nothing. They found a key on the ground and used it in a lock.
Yeah. It comes down to Freedom to roam in Northern Europe and squatters rights in the extreme physical parallel. Entering is fine as long as there is no breaking.
In the digital relm i would argue that brute forcing a password is like jimmying a lock, but finding a password is like finding a key.
But I think your point is the strongest. It doesn’t matter what either of us think. It totally depends on the justice system that has jurisdiction and those rules could be anything.
So your claim is that if I sit down at a computer that isn’t mine and has no security measures in place, and then open a file, that I have legally “hacked” the computer?
The minimal definition you can fall back to is “unauthorized access”. But now you have to establish and argue that an unsecured computer/system is off limits to everyone except the owner. Which then opens up a big can of worms with network connected devices, and demonstrates that such basic and literal verbatim interpretation doesn’t work in reality.
You can call it hacking or whatever. The legal term is: unauthorized access to a computer system.
Think about it in any other way? So I’m just walking down the street… I see a house… I go open a door… I open the fridge. Make myself a sandwich. Then go to a bedroom that’s not mine. Put on some underwear that isn’t mine and leave some stains on the sheets…
Why don’t you just go rape somebody? And clearly you have authorization to access that vagina or that butthole or mouth or however your fetish desires???
Just tell me you’ve been on Epstein’s Island… Jfc? Wtf is wrong with you, CeeBee_Eh?
The legal term is: unauthorized access to a computer system.
No, the legal definition is this:
In a legal context, hacking is a term for utilizing an unconventional or illicit means to gain unauthorized access to a digital device, computer system, or network.
So this wasn’t illicit, because the FBI publicly published the data. So the argument has to be made with “unconventional”. This is what I disagree on.
Think about it in any other way? So I’m just walking down the street… I see a house… I go open a door… I open the fridge. Make myself a sandwich. Then go to a bedroom that’s not mine. Put on some underwear that isn’t mine and leave some stains on the sheets…
That’s illegal. There’s a law for that. There are also laws that protect digital assets in a similar way, and they fall under Cybercrime.
Why don’t you just go rape somebody? And clearly you have authorization to access that vagina or that butthole or mouth or however your fetish desires???
Calm down there, Epstein.
Just tell me you’ve been on Epstein’s Island… Jfc? Wtf is wrong with you, CeeBee_Eh?
You suck at rage baiting. I’m advocating for exposing more of the emails and not letting people refer to it as “hacking”, and you’re so enraged by someone disagreeing with you that you literally call that person “Epstein”. I know mental health care isn’t much of a thing in the US, but please find some help. For all our sakes.
Unauthorized access is hacking.
Doesn’t matter if a person has a computer with no password at all. If you are on their computer and you are not authorized to use their computer that is a crime.
If i give someone my bank details and passwords and they empty my account, can I claim I’ve been hacked?
No.
What part of “unauthorized access” is so difficult for people to understand?
How is authorization determined?
Probably by giving out your account details.
So, Epstein has given out his account details by putting them in an email.
Were those details only used by the people he directly sent them to?
Can dead men either provide or deny authorisation?
Can dead men get hacked?
When I die, my assets should go to the people I named as my beneficiaries. If someone else comes along to try and take ownership of my assets, they should definitely be denied. Also, just because I’m dead doesn’t mean anyone should have access to my devices, especially if password locked. So I would answer both questions with yes.
deleted by creator
A TOS violation is not the same as breaking the law. If that were the case then every single person on the face on the planet would be a criminal.
deleted by creator
The account holder violated the contract with the serviceprovider. The “hacker” has no agreement with anyone so they violated nothing. They found a key on the ground and used it in a lock.
deleted by creator
Yeah. It comes down to Freedom to roam in Northern Europe and squatters rights in the extreme physical parallel. Entering is fine as long as there is no breaking.
In the digital relm i would argue that brute forcing a password is like jimmying a lock, but finding a password is like finding a key.
But I think your point is the strongest. It doesn’t matter what either of us think. It totally depends on the justice system that has jurisdiction and those rules could be anything.
Removed by mod
So your claim is that if I sit down at a computer that isn’t mine and has no security measures in place, and then open a file, that I have legally “hacked” the computer?
The minimal definition you can fall back to is “unauthorized access”. But now you have to establish and argue that an unsecured computer/system is off limits to everyone except the owner. Which then opens up a big can of worms with network connected devices, and demonstrates that such basic and literal verbatim interpretation doesn’t work in reality.
That’s not ‘my claim.’ That’s the law.
You can call it hacking or whatever. The legal term is: unauthorized access to a computer system.
Think about it in any other way? So I’m just walking down the street… I see a house… I go open a door… I open the fridge. Make myself a sandwich. Then go to a bedroom that’s not mine. Put on some underwear that isn’t mine and leave some stains on the sheets…
Why don’t you just go rape somebody? And clearly you have authorization to access that vagina or that butthole or mouth or however your fetish desires???
Just tell me you’ve been on Epstein’s Island… Jfc? Wtf is wrong with you, CeeBee_Eh?
No, the legal definition is this:
Source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/hacking
So this wasn’t illicit, because the FBI publicly published the data. So the argument has to be made with “unconventional”. This is what I disagree on.
That’s illegal. There’s a law for that. There are also laws that protect digital assets in a similar way, and they fall under Cybercrime.
Calm down there, Epstein.
You suck at rage baiting. I’m advocating for exposing more of the emails and not letting people refer to it as “hacking”, and you’re so enraged by someone disagreeing with you that you literally call that person “Epstein”. I know mental health care isn’t much of a thing in the US, but please find some help. For all our sakes.