News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Instagram's Million Dollar Bug by dsacco on Thursday December 17, 2015 @05:13PM (#10754971)
The "privacy violations" statement is what I was talking about. I suppose you could make an argument that this is not sufficiently explicit for this scenario, but I believe it covers this ground. It is a privacy violation to retrieve sensitive data via an exploit.
Re:Instagram's Million Dollar Bug by larssorenson on Thursday December 17, 2015 @05:26PM (#10755051)
It is worth pointing out that Wesley specifically avoiding dumping data from the S3 buckets which were directly related to User Data / Information. "There were quite a few S3 buckets dedicated to storing users' Instagram images, both pre and post processing. Since the Faceboook Whitehat rules state that researchers need to "make a good faith effort to avoid privacy violations", I avoided downloading any content from those buckets" In fact, the only 'sensitive data' he retrieved in regards to user account information were the weak employee logins.
Re:Instagram's Million Dollar Bug by webvictim on Thursday December 17, 2015 @07:44PM (#10755844)
Is gathering up the credentials of employees not also a privacy violation? At this point you're going way beyond proving that you have access to something - you're actively trying to probe and see how deep the rabbit hole goes. I don't (personally) believe that this is acceptable behaviour under a white hat program.
Re:Instagram's Million Dollar Bug by larssorenson on Thursday December 17, 2015 @10:58PM (#10756536)
I see your point but I'm not sure if having passwords like 'changeme' qualifies as being a privacy violation... You should almost expect it to happen at that point.

But I do recognize that cracking passwords goes a step too far.

Re:Instagram's Million Dollar Bug by sanderjd on Thursday December 17, 2015 @07:02PM (#10755668)
Fair enough, I can only say that it seems like they could be more explicit on that point, but I don't see anybody arguing against the idea that that their rules could use clarification.