Post #3134773
2024-01-18 12:52 UTC
Replies (3)
-
@ww@xyzzy.link 2024-01-18 16:02
@husjon@fosstodon.org @thisismissem@hachyderm.io @WPalant@infosec.exchange if you really want a metaphor, here's a more accurate one. there's a fulfillment center, and each customer is issued a delivery robot that will drive there and retrieve their deliveries. one customer followed the robot to see where it goes and saw that the door opens for any robot and stays open long enough for another person to enter, allowing access to everyone's deliveries. reported that to the company and got sued.
-
@geonz@mathstodon.xyz 2024-01-18 22:44
@husjon@fosstodon.org @thisismissem@hachyderm.io @WPalant@infosec.exchange Yes, that's the better analysis. "Attractive nuisance" idea works well, too. If you make it too easy/tempting then it's your responsibility.
-
@rlcw@ecoevo.social 2025-09-26 21:05
@husjon@fosstodon.org I had the same thought, but then again, in this scenario it would be breaking and entering legally speaking. And my guess is that the law is well intended, not wanting to give malicious actors the loophole to say they where just looking around - at the same time it's very bad that there is no exception anymore in clean cut cases such as this. It's also weird that the persued and ruled in the way it did. @thisismissem@hachyderm.io @WPalant@infosec.exchange