top | item 40710616 (no title) usmannk | 1 year ago Right, yeah. I estimated that a savvy attacker might have been able to get out with 50 or even 100m from this, but they would also go to jail. So... discuss order hn newest _940h|1 year ago What sort of crime are you envisioning that exploiting this would fall under? It's not always fraud to satisfy a poorly written contract, although that is commonly the case. usmannk|1 year ago Wire fraud, at minimum. This would constitute direct theft. Very similar cases have been tried and convicted several times now. avarun|1 year ago Everything is wire fraud / securities fraud load replies (1) htthbjk|1 year ago Despite what many programmers think, code is not law.Just like a bug in a smart lock does not allow you to enter a house because "you were allowed in".
_940h|1 year ago What sort of crime are you envisioning that exploiting this would fall under? It's not always fraud to satisfy a poorly written contract, although that is commonly the case. usmannk|1 year ago Wire fraud, at minimum. This would constitute direct theft. Very similar cases have been tried and convicted several times now. avarun|1 year ago Everything is wire fraud / securities fraud load replies (1) htthbjk|1 year ago Despite what many programmers think, code is not law.Just like a bug in a smart lock does not allow you to enter a house because "you were allowed in".
usmannk|1 year ago Wire fraud, at minimum. This would constitute direct theft. Very similar cases have been tried and convicted several times now.
htthbjk|1 year ago Despite what many programmers think, code is not law.Just like a bug in a smart lock does not allow you to enter a house because "you were allowed in".
_940h|1 year ago
usmannk|1 year ago
avarun|1 year ago
htthbjk|1 year ago
Just like a bug in a smart lock does not allow you to enter a house because "you were allowed in".