I said the law looks at whether it was authorized access or not, I was not citing any literal lines from the law. Didn’t read the article because I know this already because of the industry I work in and I took a course a number of years ago that literally was about this.
I’ve been in IT for a few years and I’ve changed companies a few times.
I just checked my login creds for various systems of 3 previous employers and like half of them still work.
Unfortunately it’s a lot more common than any IT department would like to admit
He didn’t hack anything. He used a password that wasn’t changed.
He also didn’t delete servers
Technically he was not authorized to use the computer system due to his termination which the law looks at and calls hacking.
I’ll give you half a point because technically you are right.
deleted by creator
I said the law looks at whether it was authorized access or not, I was not citing any literal lines from the law. Didn’t read the article because I know this already because of the industry I work in and I took a course a number of years ago that literally was about this.
Which was also used repeatedly over the course of 3-4 months to gain access via a non-corporate laptop without the IT doing anything about it.
Yeah that seems pretty negligent on their part.
I’ve been in IT for a few years and I’ve changed companies a few times. I just checked my login creds for various systems of 3 previous employers and like half of them still work. Unfortunately it’s a lot more common than any IT department would like to admit
It’s only hacking if it’s in a CVE.
Anything else is just sparkling unauthorized access.
But clickbait…
I hack my supermarket by stealing mangoes.
That’s just not true.
Social engineering isn’t hacking. It’s social engineering
Hacking humans, not technology
Social engineering = human hacking