| ▲ | janoelze 2 days ago |
| it's been 5 hours. even manual action to take down the most sensitive files should have completed about 3 hours ago at most. what is happening. |
|
| ▲ | tag2103 2 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| Nothing- they are just hoping this will blow over. |
| |
| ▲ | Barbing 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Do I have to start emailing the people in the leaked documents with screenshots? | | |
| ▲ | oefrha 2 days ago | parent [-] | | Leaving a paper trail of you having accessed unauthorized private info is a bad idea, some crazy lawyer could decide to include you in a suit. Just not worth the hassle. Email a tip line about the general situation. | | |
| ▲ | ndsipa_pomu 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | How is it unauthorised if it's freely available via a search without having to bypass any login? It'd be like putting up an advert and then trying to sue anyone who sees it. | | |
| ▲ | oefrha 2 days ago | parent [-] | | Some crazy lawyer included my parents in a traffic death suit’s defendants while they were victims who had their car badly damaged when the reckless driver rammed into two cars (including my parents’) and two pedestrians. The question isn’t whether you’re at fault, it’s whether you want to risk getting a court summons. | | |
| ▲ | ndsipa_pomu 2 days ago | parent [-] | | I'm confused about what you're saying - are you saying that your parents risked getting a court summons though they weren't at fault? Surely the entire point of the court system is to determine who, if anyone, is at fault. | | |
| ▲ | oefrha 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | They didn't get a court summons but the court did call and send the plaintiff's filing. They were clearly not in the wrong in that case but it was still a hassle and quite a confusion. The point is people can sue you even if it's BS and you still need to respond. In this case leaving a paper trail of having accessed unauthorized confidential information looks a lot like being in the wrong, so the potential hassle is a lot higher. You can argue it's not unauthorized after all, and you'll likely win, but you may need to expand time and energy arguing in the first place. And it could be significant. Edit: In addition, (a) accidentally opening a confidential document -> oops, close immediately; and (b) taking a screenshot could be different legally (NAL yada yada), doing the latter could make it a lot harder to defend yourself. | | | |
| ▲ | efreak 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Determining who is at fault involves extreme annoyance and inconvenience for those who had fingers pointed at them, regardless of whether or not they were actually involved. If you involve yourself willingly, you're inviting that on yourself. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | Ekaros 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Not to forget some eager prosecutors. They can still try to prosecute for accessing material even if they end up losing. Lot of hassle there. | |
| ▲ | Barbing 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Good call! |
|
| |
| ▲ | tdeck 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Admit no fault, ignore the criticism, keep doing the same thing, receive no consequences. I wonder how the folks at Fiverr's Tel Aviv HQ learned this strategy. |
|
|
| ▲ | ollien 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I've never been in the position that I've had to deal with this. Is the best you can do in this situation to pull the files and optionally republish them to a robots.txt'd path (with authn/z, too)? I can't imagine you can get it pulled from search engines very quickly... |
| |
| ▲ | weird-eye-issue 2 days ago | parent [-] | | There's a way to submit a request with Google ticket content taken down and then the easiest way would be probably to do a no index in the header response for future content |
|
|
| ▲ | elevatortrim 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| My guess is that if they take down the public hosting, most clients would lose access to work they paid for and fiverr has no way to put these back behind an authorisation. It is just a public list of files, either everyone has access to your file, or do not, including you. |
| |
| ▲ | tom1337 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | But it seems like they might've just pulled the plug for everyone. I cannot access images from a seller. They throw a 404 as well. | |
| ▲ | eudamoniac 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | My guess is that there is literally no one there who knows how to fix this. Seriously, look through the proposed solutions here, plenty of devs wouldn't know how to do any of them. It might not even be possible, with their architecture, to fix it quickly and retain functionality. I have worked in a place full of noobs where I'm certain none of the devs including me would have the first idea how to fix something like this. |
|
