SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
USA Today has a story about a New Jersey couple who allegedly used a glitch in Lowes website to steal merchandise.
A New Jersey couple used a website glitch to try and get more than $258,000 worth of goods — everything from a gazebo to an air conditioner to a stainless steel grill — for free from a home improvement store, authorities said.
Ultimately, the couple was only able to secure nearly $13,000 worth of merchandise from Lowe's after exploiting "weaknesses" in the company's website to have the items shipped to their home in Brick for free, according to a release from the Ocean County Prosecutor's Office.
Romela Velazquez, 24, was arrested and charged with theft by deception and computer criminal activity for accessing a computer system with the purpose to defraud. She attempted to get about $258,068 worth of unpaid merchandise from Lowe's, according to the release.
She actually received about $12,971 in stolen products, according to the release.
Her husband, Kimy Velazquez, 40, was charged with third-degree receipt of stolen property and fencing for his role in the alleged scheme.
The couple tried to sell some of the products on a local Facebook "buy and sell" group for half of the original sale price, listing the products as "new in box," authorities said.
According to an article on NJ.com, an attorney for the couple has stated that Velazquez is just an expert shopper, not a criminal hacker.
Jef Henninger, an attorney for Romela Velazquez, said his client is "the farthest thing from a computer hacker."
"Like many young mothers, she needs to stretch every dollar she can," Henninger said in a statement. "As a result, she has learned to spot good deals. These are the same deals that any of us can take advantage of, but most of us are too busy to learn how to spot them.
"Buying things at a big discount and selling them is not illegal. As a result, she maintains her innocence (and) looks forward to her day in court."
As far as I have been able to find, no technical details about the hack have been released.
One of the more interesting details that I did see was
Lowe's, makers of Ugg shoes and Victoria's Secret have been identified as victims so far – but many more retailers were also ripped off and will eventually be identified, officials said.
Who knew?
Additional coverage at the New York Post and BleepingComputer.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Fluffeh on Tuesday August 22 2017, @01:27AM (4 children)
If you cheat the system to get a 20% discount, it's just as much stealing as getting a 100% discount using the same bug.
Having said that, I am much more concerned about the other side of the coin in this situation - it seems to imply that the vendor/business is not responsible for ensuring that their website is properly operating. Okay, sure this one sounds like a pretty obvious case of cheating on the side of the customer... but what about when the wrong price is advertised and the vendor doesn't want to fulfill the advertised price? It seems like a get out of jail free card. Also seems to imply that as a business, I can use any quality IT vendor for my needs as I am not on the hook for any screw-ups their code allows customers to do...
It's a damned race to the bottom if you ask me...
(Score: 1) by tftp on Tuesday August 22 2017, @03:08AM (2 children)
Not any more than a homeowner is responsible, when locking up his house on the way to work, to ensure that his locks are free of zero-day or any other vulnerability as known by at least one person on this Earth this very minute.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 22 2017, @03:33AM
Nope, if there's no sign of forced entry then insurance won't pay out when you're robbed. Something like 90% of household locks are trivially picked without leaving signs, but few people with brains are robbing houses.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 22 2017, @05:33AM
Really? So filthy rich corporations running their own websites are equivalent to the average homeowner? Don't you think people/corporations with that many resources should be held to a higher standard than that?
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday August 23 2017, @08:01AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves