| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 137742 | 2014-08-15 01:07:00 | PM OK's Hacking...so long as the site isn't protected!!! | ruup (1827) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1381809 | 2014-08-18 20:58:00 | True - from your link : While Nicky makes it clear that the site was insecure, it’s an open question, as a matter of law, whether this means it was not a crime to go digging around in it. This is the sort of misleading information that has been bandied around with concerning regularity. For example, the DoL website has a multitude of documents available to download and read (as do millions of other websites), so to suggest that the legality of downloading a document in a public domain and reading it is in question infers that all downloadable documents should never be opened and read because it may not be legal. This lawyer is probably very good at his job, which is in effect to bend or manipulate the truth to their own purpose, and if unable to do that, then to confuse those who he is talking to. Many in the news media have either done the same thing on purpose, or have not understood the basics of what a hack is. You haven't read all the posts in this thread. I half agree with you, but the directories and files accessed by Slater and co were not obtained through "the front door" so to speak as you imply. An "ordinary" person would not have been able to access them, you need a modicum of computer know-how to get in via the back door. Chill in post 47 put up the link where Slater tells how he did it. here is the link for easier access www.youtube.com Look at that and you will see it is not all that easy to do for any Joe Blogs off the street. |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 1381810 | 2014-08-18 22:16:00 | You haven't read all the posts in this thread. I half agree with you, but the directories and files accessed by Slater and co were not obtained through "the front door" so to speak as you imply. An "ordinary" person would not have been able to access them, you need a modicum of computer know-how to get in via the back door. Indeed, if you're wandering around a shop, to which you have public access, and the door to the office is open, what do you think would (should) happen if you went in and started copying the accounts and employee records etc, and then published some of them and posted a video of you taking them? |
fred_fish (15241) | ||
| 1381811 | 2014-08-18 22:52:00 | The real irony as I've mentioned earlier is that it is the left wing who are shooting themselves in the foot, doing the right wingers job for them with all this talk of hacking and whether it is legal, thereby deflecting attention away from the real issue: which is the use to which the information obtained was put, ie "dirty politics" as described in the book. The left wingers have used a classic right wing distraction ploy :banana |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 1381812 | 2014-08-18 22:59:00 | Indeed, if you're wandering around a shop, to which you have public access, and the door to the office is open, what do you think would (should) happen if you went in and started copying the accounts and employee records etc, and then published some of them and posted a video of you taking them? Exactly. :) You would get a free ride in a police car :) | wainuitech (129) | ||
| 1381813 | 2014-08-18 23:02:00 | In a couple of cases in recent history, ACC and WINZ, had private confidential data accessed by unauthorized individuals. In each case the responsible department concerned and government minister responsible were castigated by both the MSM and the opposition in the parliament. The individuals who got the data and tryed to take advantage of it were not. The only difference between them and Slater is the side of the political fence they sit. It would appear that it is all perfectly acceptable for the left to do it but it is completely different if the right does. |
CliveM (6007) | ||
| 1381814 | 2014-08-18 23:21:00 | Well having viewed Terry’s link I lean towards the view that the Labour Site was “Hacked”. The average “Joe Blow” would not have been able to obtain the information Slater did. And, out of interest I googled the actual meaning of Hacker HERE (en.wikipedia.org). “In the computer security context, a hacker is someone who seeks and exploits weaknesses in a computer system or computer network. Hackers may be motivated by a multitude of reasons, such as profit, protest, challenge or enjoyment.” Therefore, my personal view is the Labour Site was “Hacked” and information taken. A weakness in the Labour Party Site was “Exploited” as admitted by Slater. |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 1381815 | 2014-08-19 00:47:00 | In a couple of cases in recent history, ACC and WINZ, had private confidential data accessed by unauthorized individuals. In each case the responsible department concerned and government minister responsible were castigated by both the MSM and the opposition in the parliament. The individuals who got the data and tryed to take advantage of it were not. The only difference between them and Slater is the side of the political fence they sit. It would appear that it is all perfectly acceptable for the left to do it but it is completely different if the right does. Your assertions would carry more weight if you provided documentary evidence or references. In regard to ACC, the only leaks I can remember were caused by ACC themselves sending out client information attached to emails, or sent emails to the wrong person. If you are referring to the Pullar/Boag case, then Michelle Boag is an ex National Party President, hardly left wing. She did an excellent job by recording the interview with the ACC managers who claimed Pullar tried to blackmail ACC. Hence the police did not bring any charges against either Bronwyn Pullar or Michelle Boag because it showed the ACC managers had been lying. www.stuff.co.nz Here again we had Whaleoil calling Boag a poisonous lying scumbag, charming, I hate to give him publicity but this is the link: www.whaleoil.co.nz Edit: an example of dirty politics |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 1381816 | 2014-08-19 01:54:00 | Your assertions would carry more weight if you provided documentary evidence or references.In regard to ACC, the only leaks I can remember were caused by ACC themselves sending out client information attached to emails, or sent emails to the wrong person.If you are referring to the Pullar/Boag case, then Michelle Boag is an ex National Party President, hardly left wing. She did an excellent job by recording the interview with the ACC managers who claimed Pullar tried to blackmail ACC. Hence the police did not bring any charges against either Bronwyn Pullar or Michelle Boag because it showed the ACC managers had been lying. www.stuff.co.nz again we had Whaleoil calling Boag a poisonous lying scumbag, charming, I hate to give him publicity but this is the link: www.whaleoil.co.nz Edit: an example of dirty politicsThe winz one he is talking abouy were the kiosk that were in the publuc foyer of winz offices.too be used by the public. But it would appear to be a totally open book without the need to enter through a backdoor | plod (107) | ||
| 1381817 | 2014-08-19 02:37:00 | The winz one he is talking abouy were the kiosk that were in the publuc foyer of winz offices.too be used by the public. But it would appear to be a totally open book without the need to enter through a backdoor I linked to an article about the Keith Ng case (www.nbr.co.nz) earlier in the thread. Also, (and again) you don't have to "hack" for it to be an "unauthorised access". In that case, he was drawing attention to, and trying to get rectified, the "security issue" with private data, rather than extracting the information for his own purposes - big difference in the intent, which, as per the legal opinion in the link, should provide a valid defence against a charge under the Crimes Act. Given the available evidence I would think Mr Slater would have a difficult time trying to stretch his case to a "colour of right" defence, if it was to proceed. |
fred_fish (15241) | ||
| 1381818 | 2014-08-20 02:06:00 | There is a very good summing up of this saga HERE (www.nzherald.co.nz). | B.M. (505) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 | |||||