If they were to press charges probably the guy, but the “hack” was so low stakes, he just cut someone on a wait-list, that the gym or cops probably won’t go after him.
Also the gym may hold some responsibility since the endpoint had no auth which is negligence, so they’d probably want to keep this on the down low.
It’s not clear from the article; who is being held responsible for this attack?
If they were to press charges probably the guy, but the “hack” was so low stakes, he just cut someone on a wait-list, that the gym or cops probably won’t go after him.
Also the gym may hold some responsibility since the endpoint had no auth which is negligence, so they’d probably want to keep this on the down low.
The guy did ask Claude to uncancel the appointment, so that’s nice.
There was no attack, this is all just an ad. Didn’t the guy in question work for an AI company?
Yes, but I don’t see the angle where his company directly benefited–the marketing win goes to Claude.
No one. It was ‘autonomous’. That’s just the way the world is now. You have to accept it so that we can win the AI war.
Cool. Now I can attack the White House without repercussions