Re:Governor vows criminal prosecution of reporter who found ...
by kelnos on Thursday October 14, 2021 @04:30PM
(#28869639)
The data in this case clearly had value; OP admitted to continuing to change numbers in the URL to get more information about what plans other companies were signing up for, because that information was valuable to them.
Re:Governor vows criminal prosecution of reporter who found ...
by Talanes on Thursday October 14, 2021 @04:57PM
(#28869990)
You're assuming the "because that information was valuable to them" part. Or you're using such a broad definition of valuable that would also make this comment thread valuable because I have refreshed it multiple times.
While you could construct hypotheticals where OP is using the health plan information to gain actual value, they are all so far-fetched I wouldn't buy them as a fictional plotline. Dude was probably just curious.
This definition of fraud doesn't define the word "defraud"? I don't know how I'm supposed to see if it fits or not.
It can't mean any action, or going into a store, lying about my name, and asking what aisle has baked beans would fit. Because that has "deceit" and "any service".
If I interpret things as the service being minimal and provided for free, so that I'm not deceptively getting the service, then we have to look at what actually gets sent to me, and whether it's "property, money or valuable security". And since it's just a copy of the data sent at no cost, it's much harder to argue fraud exists.