No, that’s just the definition that dumb fucks use to justify punishing people for their own stupidity. Unauthorized access and whatever you do with it is completely independent from HOW you gain access. And using legitimate credentials is not hacking. Obtaining the credentials may be done by hacking, but if they are just negligently tossed into the world, it’s not.
Same as losing your house keys and having someone use them to enter your house is unauthorized entry and violation of a set of laws, but it is NOT breaking into a house.
Same as losing your house keys and having someone use them to enter your house is unauthorized entry and violation of a set of laws, but it is NOT breaking into a house.
It IS breaking into a house. The law you are violating in this scenario is called breaking and entering.
The United States, Canada, France, Germany, Austria, New Zealand, Spain, South Africa, and probably many more.
Other countries might call it something else, like the UK calls it burglary, but it pretty much always falls under the same law as breaking into a house using more forceful means on entry.
Then I am sure you wouldn’t mind quoting me “the law” from Germany, by which entering someone else’s house with a key they lost on the street is considered “breaking in”, would you?
Btw - don’t bother: you are arguing a strawman that I used as an example anyways, it’s still not “hacking” if you use a password that you found somewhere. Now stop distracting from the administration in the divided states of middle northern america protecting child rapists including their head of state.
First, I can, but since you don’t want me to, I won’t. Second, it’s not a strawman, it’s your own analogy and it doesn’t work because it’s based on a false assumption. Using a found key to enter a house unauthorized is breaking in the same way that using a found password to enter an account unauthorized is hacking. The analogy works against your case, not for it.
Now stop distracting from the administration in the divided states of middle northern america protecting child rapists including their head of state.
This is the wildest accusation. I’m not the one deconstructing narratives around the emails to put my own spin on them. I’m the one using established terminology to properly understand the context of the story. You on the other hand, are claiming that Epstein’s emails weren’t hacked, which makes it conveniently easy to dismiss the story as spreading misinformation. I don’t believe this is your intention, but you should be honest, if anyone is distracting from anything here, it’s you. If that’s not what you are doing, then it’s not what I am doing either.
It sounds like you know you are wrong and just want to score a cheap point against me. I didn’t say anything rude or mean to you and have given you absolutely no reason to accuse me of that. Just relax. We’re all friends here.
That is hacking.
No hacking is circumventing the security…if you send out the password it is really bad secops. Stop selling negligence of a party as hacking.
Hacking is gaining unauthorised access to a system.
can’t unauthorize if he’s dead.
No, that’s just the definition that dumb fucks use to justify punishing people for their own stupidity. Unauthorized access and whatever you do with it is completely independent from HOW you gain access. And using legitimate credentials is not hacking. Obtaining the credentials may be done by hacking, but if they are just negligently tossed into the world, it’s not.
Same as losing your house keys and having someone use them to enter your house is unauthorized entry and violation of a set of laws, but it is NOT breaking into a house.
Nope, that’s the literal definition.
Not to worry though - I see lot more dumb fuckery in your future.
Now dance!
It IS breaking into a house. The law you are violating in this scenario is called breaking and entering.
“the law” you say? In which country, huh? There’s more than one in the world, you know?
The United States, Canada, France, Germany, Austria, New Zealand, Spain, South Africa, and probably many more.
Other countries might call it something else, like the UK calls it burglary, but it pretty much always falls under the same law as breaking into a house using more forceful means on entry.
Then I am sure you wouldn’t mind quoting me “the law” from Germany, by which entering someone else’s house with a key they lost on the street is considered “breaking in”, would you? Btw - don’t bother: you are arguing a strawman that I used as an example anyways, it’s still not “hacking” if you use a password that you found somewhere. Now stop distracting from the administration in the divided states of middle northern america protecting child rapists including their head of state.
First, I can, but since you don’t want me to, I won’t. Second, it’s not a strawman, it’s your own analogy and it doesn’t work because it’s based on a false assumption. Using a found key to enter a house unauthorized is breaking in the same way that using a found password to enter an account unauthorized is hacking. The analogy works against your case, not for it.
This is the wildest accusation. I’m not the one deconstructing narratives around the emails to put my own spin on them. I’m the one using established terminology to properly understand the context of the story. You on the other hand, are claiming that Epstein’s emails weren’t hacked, which makes it conveniently easy to dismiss the story as spreading misinformation. I don’t believe this is your intention, but you should be honest, if anyone is distracting from anything here, it’s you. If that’s not what you are doing, then it’s not what I am doing either.
It sounds like you know you are wrong and just want to score a cheap point against me. I didn’t say anything rude or mean to you and have given you absolutely no reason to accuse me of that. Just relax. We’re all friends here.