SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A 19 year old teenager was charged with 'unauthorized use of a computer' after downloading over 7,000 records from the Nova Scotia Freedom-of-Information web portal. The teenager whose name has not been released, has been accused of stealing documents from the portal, with many of them being publicly accessible and redacted.
-- submitted from IRC
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Teenager Charged for Nova Scotia Freedom of Information Web Portal Breach
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 43 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Hacking's just another word for nothing left to kludge.
(Score: 2) by canopic jug on Monday April 23 2018, @04:00PM (2 children)
There's too many to keep track of.
Nevertheless, there are always better sites to point to than the slow and lame Bleeping Computer.
The CBC cover it last week with Teen charged in Nova Scotia government breach says he had 'no malicious intent' [www.cbc.ca] and Story of N.S. teen accused in government website breach resonates with programmers [www.cbc.ca]. Even the Russian government's own Sputnik News covered it last week with Canadian Teenager Faces 10 Years in Prison for Downloading 7,000 FOIA Releases [sputniknews.com].
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 23 2018, @10:32PM (1 child)
> Nevertheless, there are always better sites to point to than the slow and lame Bleeping Computer.
I think you mean slow in the sense of not being the first to break the news, not in the sense that the pages take a long time to load. For me the loading time was acceptable.
> The CBC cover it last week with Teen charged in Nova Scotia government breach says he had 'no malicious intent'
Bleeping Computer links to that story. As for the timeliness of this, that's not a priority for the SoylentNews editors. For example, in the submissions queue there's a pending submission [soylentnews.org] about an event that happened on the morning of April 14 (New York time). If it's approved, it won't run until the wee hours of April 24 (UTC). That's almost ten days. The date on Bleeping Computer's story says April 17, whilst the date on the CBC story says April 16. That's a difference of about one day. This story was submitted on April 18 and ran on April 23 (UTC). It was in the submissions queue for about five days.
> Sputnik News covered it last week
Yes, and the date on the Sputnik News story is April 18. Depending on time zones, the Bleeping Computer story may have been published first. You're telling us that Bleeping Computer is not "reliable" -- why? You also tell us that BBC News is biassed toward Microsoft. Then you direct us to Sputnik News, which is funded by the Russian government. Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] offers examples of biassed or non-factual stories that have appeared on Sputnik News. In this particular story, an assertion by the defendant is reported as fact: "...not realising that the records should not have been accessible...." An assertion by the government is reported as questionable: "...Internal Services Minister Patricia Arab claiming...." That is bias. The government of Russia, I imagine, may be pleased to have the opportunity to convince us that Canada does not respect freedom of inquiry, because Russia's own infringements of human rights, by comparison, appear less consequential.
I don't speak Russian. Your subject line seems to be a Russian word for "alcoholism." I'm not grasping how it relates to the rest of your comment.
(Score: 2) by canopic jug on Tuesday April 24 2018, @05:40AM
All news sites suck. The just suck in different ways.
The best counter to that is to try to use articles that are as close to the primary source as possible. Bleeping Computer is almost always a layer or two further away from the primary source than the more timely sites. If you aren't receiving the information directly from the primary souce, it is guaranteed to be distorted [chadjthiele.com] with each degree of separation adding its own distortions. So, again, you need to be as close to the primary source as possible.
However, each source might have only a small part of the big picture so it is necessary for the article's author to check with multiple primary sources. The best we can ask for then is an article in direct contact with multiple primary sources. Back to the bias, the news sites have diferent staff, editors, and advertisers or funding sources. Those all combine to make them realiable on certain topics and unreliable on other topics. That changes from time to time. The only thing that can be done about that is to keep track of that and adjust news source selection accordingly to gain articles from sites where they are strong and avoid articles on topics they fail at.
So if you use the Bleeping Computer don't be lazy and just paste their link. Instead find the names and places in a current news search engine because by the time the news hits Bleeping Computer it will be well indexed and you can find the articles closer to the primary sources. Same goes for crap sites like Daily Mail and many others that don't need to be mentioned. This is all high-school level journalism. It's also source evaluation that use to be covered a lot at the undergraduate levels.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.