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
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.
He didn’t hack anything. He used a password that wasn’t changed.
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.
That’s just not true.
Social engineering isn’t hacking. It’s social engineering
Hacking humans, not technology
Social engineering = human hacking
But clickbait…
I hack my supermarket by stealing mangoes.
Technically he was not authorized to use the computer system due to his termination which the law looks at and calls hacking.
No, the law specifically called this “unauthorized access to computer material”. It’s right there in the article.
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’ll give you half a point because technically you are right.
He also didn’t delete servers