‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Hackers Got Inside a Flock Camera

586 points · 270 comments · driverdan

  1. ktm5j · · focus · HN ↗
    > "We liberated hardware"

    Ya know, I'm not on Flock's side here.. but be real, this is theft. You should be able to own that if you're going to do something like this.

    1. outside1234 · · focus · HN ↗
      And my privacy? The threat to democracy? Does Flock own that? Why is always the poors that need to own morality?
    2. intrasight · · focus · HN ↗
      But we own the cameras
      1. ktm5j · · focus · HN ↗
        No we don't, even if our taxes paid for them. You don't own public buildings either, that's not how it works.
        1. jackb4040 · · focus · HN ↗
          But sir, we liberated them
          1. ktm5j · · focus · HN ↗
            It's ma'am, and no you stole them.
    3. soupfordummies · · focus · HN ↗
      That's also the biggest plot-hole in the first Star Wars movie. Princess Leia is supposed to be this righteous noble of the moral resistance and yet she STEALS the Death Star plans!
      1. overtone1000 · · focus · HN ↗
        <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=49422404">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=49422404
    4. overtone1000 · · focus · HN ↗
      I don&#x27;t get the impression that anyone writing about this thinks it&#x27;s legal. I think the argument would be that it&#x27;s justified.
      1. ktm5j · · focus · HN ↗
        Then why bother using that language? The camera doesn&#x27;t need rescuing, why not just &quot;we took&quot;.

        Also, is it really justified? Did we learn anything useful here that we didn&#x27;t already know? There&#x27;s more effective ways to push back against Flock, townships (like my own) are having plenty of success stories without stealing anything.

    5. 0b4a1f8caa8b2a · · focus · HN ↗
      Anything becomes permissible when you believe yourself to be “on the right side of history.”
    6. micromacrofoot · · focus · HN ↗
      liberation is often used to refer to something that, while technically legal, the people that are subject to it did not agree to
    7. jkestner · · focus · HN ↗
      “I kept trying to explain in between haymakers that we were better than this and on top of that it wasn’t likely to be ruled on favorably as far as the courts.” - Luke O’Neil <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;flaminghydra.com&#x2F;the-end-and-after-2&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;flaminghydra.com&#x2F;the-end-and-after-2&#x2F;
    8. IAmBroom · · focus · HN ↗
      &gt; You should be able to own that if you&#x27;re going to do something like this.

      Um, are you saying the hackers should admit they broke the law? Or that Flock should righteously own the data they collect?

      Either way, I d&#x2F;c. Flock cameras are probably insecure, and their data is potentially dangerous.

      Bad laws exist, and following them may be prudent at times, but the act of following them isn&#x27;t a moral imperative.

    9. rconti · · focus · HN ↗
      You don&#x27;t think maybe it&#x27;s just a little bit tongue-in-cheek? Maybe a reference to how the US Military sometimes goes into foreign countries saying we&#x27;ll be greeted as liberators?
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.