[rla3rd]

not hacking. having access to an audio feed over a video feed that requires buffering is hardly news. kudos to whoever realized that you could get the information faster over audio when the information was released at the same time across both channels.

[gruez]

>kudos to whoever realized that you could get the information faster over audio when the information was released at the same time across both channels.

According to the article, the audio feed was a backup, and a third party supplier misused it. It definitely wasn't someone "realizing" that there was a public audio feed with a lower delay.

>the Bank confirmed that a third party supplier “misused” an audio feed of certain of the Bank press conferences since earlier this year. The audio was installed to serve as a back-up in case the video failed.

[Redoubts]

What does a “backup” mean, really? When a site posts multiple links to a stream, latter ones are “backups” but I’m not forbidden from using them. Most of the time, backups are just less good alternatives. Ostensibly, a non-video stream should fit the bill...

[vsareto]

This is like leaving important information open and then blaming someone else for not auditing you.

Both parties have blame and one of them is trying to throw the other under the bus.

[OJFord]

It wasn't supposed to be available ordinarily, it was a backup feed they could switch over to if required.

The supplier was selling access to it without the right to do so, and knowing full well what they were selling.