this post was submitted on 04 May 2026
131 points (97.8% liked)
Technology
84359 readers
4012 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Hacker? Not a hacker. This information is broadcast openly.
TIL if(wireless_signal=OR("tazer","bodycam"),"Police Detected", ) is hacking.
I learned a while ago that clicking around on a web site and accidentally wandering into an area that is supposed to be secure but isn't is hacking as well
That literally is hacking, though. Poking around until you find a vulnerability.
In theory, the difference would be intent. If you proceed to inform others of the vulnerability or exploit it yourself to share secrets, the malicious intent is hard to deny.
If you just click around to see what the site has to offer, it becomes harder to prove. Some places have passed laws banning the mere accessing of content that should not be accessible, thereby putting the burden of proof on the defendant to show that they did not know the link would lead to confidential information, made no attempt to extract it, immediately withdrew upon realisation and so on.
On one hand, brief amd harmless access might not be worth legal action anyway, unless actual damage was done, so the expectation is probably that discretion in enforcement would moderate the heavy-handedness of the law. That isn't exactly unusual: It's easier to let something slide than to punish a transgression there is no law against.
One the other, trusting the fairness of that system might not be a good idea...
I don’t think any jury in the world would call clicking on links literally hacking. When I read poking around, that is what I think of. And their point is that if you click on a link that takes you to a secure area because of bad security, it is defined as hacking by the law in some jurisdictions. This is because those laws don't describe the action, they simply say "accessing" certain data. Which is lame.
Here in Germany clicking links is not hacking. Website owner is responsible for where the link goes to. Remember the link disclaimer on websites?
But typing pageId=2 instead of pageId=1 opened via link is hacking.
Clicking show page source and seeing cleartext passwords left in there is hacking.
On login forgetting to type your password and entering with an empty password is hacking.
What the deutsche fuck
@streetcoder @Modern_medicine_isnt thats funny, I never dig the defenition of hacking here, but everytime I see someone hacking on news they are with a sweatshirt wirh the cmd open making ping to google, i think it must be something like that
So a chess player that exploits an opponent’s weakness is hacking?
A snake that finds an entrance to a gopher burrow is hacking?
“Finding vulnerabilities” is the kind of dangerously overbroad generalization that gave us the DMCA.
And the gopher magistrates are absolutely furious, I tell you!
Reminds me of 15 years ago.