Re:Court: Violating a site’s terms of service isn’t criminal...
by CiPHPerCoder on Wednesday April 01, 2020 @02:12AM
(#22746184)
> Is obfuscation a type of authorisation?
No.
And even if you tried to argue that, the exploit was public on exploit-db for years, and therefore the expected security from the broken obfuscation is zero bits; so in this case, it would not count.
More pertinent:
> Authentication Not required (Authentication is not required to exploit the vulnerability.)
No.
And even if you tried to argue that, the exploit was public on exploit-db for years, and therefore the expected security from the broken obfuscation is zero bits; so in this case, it would not count.
More pertinent:
> Authentication Not required (Authentication is not required to exploit the vulnerability.)