Frankly, the guy can dress it up all he likes. He hacked the clubs website. It's no different to hacking any other site, you take a stand and people think twice about doing it next time
If the club presses charges against a 17 year old fan there will be a backlash it will be a PR nightmare so bring it on!
All the information suggests it was on a public page, just not one you'd expect fans to find. Do you have intelligence to the contrary? And even if he did hack it, bloody hell, I'm glad if it ****s on the corporate dickheads who are turning the sport into a woman's game. Might not have been his intention, but good on the lad.
So why does the link clearly state that did not hack the club's website? "Chris Brown did not hack into the club's website, but managed to obtain the pictures from a section that was being worked on." Anyway, there will be no charges brought... "Police have said all parties had agreed the matter could be resolved through a "face-to-face" meeting." No doubt the club will use this to repair some of the PR damage that this has caused, photo's in the EDP,an article of the kid shaking hands with McNally, and a complementary season ticket thrown in!
Am I the only Canary here that thinks Ip5w1ch's kit launch video is better than ours this year? Our one from last year was infinitely better than both though.
You know their going to throw the book at this kid McNally won't like it one bit. It's a pity as this kit is not the best one we have and I can imagine he'll get a ban of some kind.
fact is, whatever method you use, obtaining the picture was hacking. People seem to think hacking has to be done like your in the matrix or something. the picture was in an area he wasn't supposed to access and he must have known what the rammifications were going to be.
If it's not hacking then how has this kid got hold of the images prior to a launch? Is he friends with a designer at Errea? Is friends with essential backroom staff and players at the club most of which have probably signed agreements? No I highly doubt it. Some of you please do me favour and don't give up your day job for law enforcement as your absolutely dreadful.
If it was on a public page, it was NOT hacking. You're trying to redefine the word by saying it's accessing "something you're not supposed to". I suggest you use a dictionary, or better, some common sense. On the Leeds website, for instance, if you type something like www.leedsunited.com/matchday_images (not that, but it's something like that), you can access all the club's matchday shots that aren't released to the public and aren't linked anywhere else. This kid could have done a similar thing on the NCFC site.
Guy accessed source code from the independant site handling the kit launch. Pretty sure thats hacking in one form or another... poor security on the website companies side? Yes of course, but Norwich put a lot of effort into this kit launch and through good intentions or whatever this guy messed it up.
He accessed source code, he had to purposefully get around mechanisms to do so. Is that not hacking? the definition of hacking is surely cracking an area of a system that isn't accessable?
We may as well give it up, Iqbal, some of this lot have this kid convicted already, despite what the article and the club have said! Just as well it will never get to court (obviously for the fact that he's not broken the law), he wouldn't want to find one or two of this lot on the jury!
Ok, so in this make-believe scenario, what exactly will the club sue him for?, what damages will they ask for, and how do you think the damages will be quantified?
