I realize it is quick to be against Fizz, but I thought ethical hacking required prior permission.
Am I to understand you can attempt to hack any computer to gain unauthorized access without prior approval? That doesn't seem legal at all.
Whether or not there was a vulnerability, was the action taken actually legal under current law? I don't see anything indicating for or against in the article. Just posturing that "ethical hacking" is good and saying you are secure when you aren't is bad. None of that seems relevant to the actual question of what the law says.
Am I to understand you can attempt to hack any computer to gain unauthorized access without prior approval? That doesn't seem legal at all.
Whether or not there was a vulnerability, was the action taken actually legal under current law? I don't see anything indicating for or against in the article. Just posturing that "ethical hacking" is good and saying you are secure when you aren't is bad. None of that seems relevant to the actual question of what the law says.