But, honestly..... given the fact that he's made no statements or apologies for how lax the security on that platform was, which lead to some of the data in this huge 'leak'/data scrape, meh.
It wasn't really a breach. It was a scrape of publically available data. That in it and of itself is fine, simple enough, and perfectly legal (unless you live within the EU, but meh at this point).
The question, however, becomes if what she did and is promoting can be construed as aiding and abetting targeted harassment, doxxing and attacks against the people that she's leaking out info on. I think it is - especially if someone innocent and totally unrelated is targeted, mis-labelled and hung out to dry.
There's also numerous ethics questions about what she did. As someone who used to - we'll say hang out with and talk to - not-so-whitehat groups and people, those types always had some sort of moral code about the things that they did. You didn't touch someone or something for their politics.
Because the people behind Parler haven't got an iota of a fucking clue about InfoSec.
If I can authenticate to a service legitimately and run a query to an endpoint that returns unlimited information to me, without any sort of illegitimate exploitation of a vulnerability, I'm simply bypassing their interfaces (which, is against (most) company's TOSs and EULAs, unless you have some sort of developer account or license - but it's not exactly the same thing as hacking or even computer trespass).
The only technical grey area that some strict judge may consider as "hacking," or more specifically, as "computer trespass" is the spoofing of the X-Forwarded-For headers that was used to bypass the 429s for Rate-Limiting errors.
He wasn't a conservative. He was independent.
I think he is a nice guy but lacked business leadership skills, especially risk management.
I'm truly not sure how I feel about this Parler bullshit, but if they didn't know that they were coming for them....... Damn, using AMAZON FFS?
Hostile internal takeover by left/big tech?
No clue.
But, honestly..... given the fact that he's made no statements or apologies for how lax the security on that platform was, which lead to some of the data in this huge 'leak'/data scrape, meh.
Good riddance.
The honeypot theory gains more and more legitimacy.
He was left and should have been removed after the data breach.
It wasn't really a breach. It was a scrape of publically available data. That in it and of itself is fine, simple enough, and perfectly legal (unless you live within the EU, but meh at this point).
The question, however, becomes if what she did and is promoting can be construed as aiding and abetting targeted harassment, doxxing and attacks against the people that she's leaking out info on. I think it is - especially if someone innocent and totally unrelated is targeted, mis-labelled and hung out to dry.
There's also numerous ethics questions about what she did. As someone who used to - we'll say hang out with and talk to - not-so-whitehat groups and people, those types always had some sort of moral code about the things that they did. You didn't touch someone or something for their politics.
Professionals have standards.
She doxxed and if it was publically available why was it promoted as a hack by Parler?
Because the people behind Parler haven't got an iota of a fucking clue about InfoSec.
If I can authenticate to a service legitimately and run a query to an endpoint that returns unlimited information to me, without any sort of illegitimate exploitation of a vulnerability, I'm simply bypassing their interfaces (which, is against (most) company's TOSs and EULAs, unless you have some sort of developer account or license - but it's not exactly the same thing as hacking or even computer trespass).
The only technical grey area that some strict judge may consider as "hacking," or more specifically, as "computer trespass" is the spoofing of the X-Forwarded-For headers that was used to bypass the 429s for Rate-Limiting errors.
But, even then, that's a stretch.