Post #4423517

@flyingpenguin@infosec.exchange Your initial reply to me referenced CFAA and that the Morris Worm case made this a done deal. Let's cite someone with actual legal expertise: "Who is liable? The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) requires intent—but no human at OpenAI intended to hack Hugging Face."* That's the intent part I wrote about, and why Morris' is irrelevant since intent was clear in that case. You have then pivoted to CMA after I linked an actual discussion on the topic and try to claim that you're now winning an Internet argument. If I link a few more things I'm sure you'll end up where I was in my first post. Your interest seems to be in being argumentative, not in fruitful discussion. *) https://foleyhoag.com/news-and-insights/blogs/security-privacy-and-the-law/2026/july/what-the-openai-hugging-face-breach-means-for-your-organization/