News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Instagram's Million Dollar Bug by dsacco on Thursday December 17, 2015 @05:36PM (#10755123)
Holding sensitive credentials is absolutely a violation of privacy. This is like saying that having a user's password is not a privacy violation unless you use it to gain access to their account.
Re:Instagram's Million Dollar Bug by enixn on Thursday December 17, 2015 @06:18PM (#10755412)
So would you agree that holding the keys to someone's house is also a privacy violation? What if instead of keys, you were holding a set of lockpicks? Would everyone's privacy of home be immediately violated?
Re:Instagram's Million Dollar Bug by foldr on Thursday December 17, 2015 @08:15PM (#10755969)
It's all a question of intent. If you keep the lockpicks so that you can pick locks, then yes. If you're a lockpick collector, then no.
Re:Instagram's Million Dollar Bug by comex on Thursday December 17, 2015 @06:43PM (#10755559)
Holding a manually chosen password can be a privacy violation because it's a small peek into the user's psyche. (I wouldn't say the employee "changeme", "instagram" etc. passwords count, although the act of running a password cracking tool meant that he could have seen a more personal password.)

Holding some randomly generated numbers that could be used to access a server is not.

Re:Instagram's Million Dollar Bug by Gravityloss on Thursday December 17, 2015 @06:19PM (#10755416)
I understood it was employee credentials, not customer.