Wasnt it a security researcher and not a hacker?
this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2025
667 points (99.6% liked)
Technology
72764 readers
1336 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The difference in terminology is simple..
A legit paycheck.
The risk is that some unknown hacker discovered this vulnerability and abused it before the researchers discovered and reported it. It sounds like the company has confirmed that didn't happen, but they aren't 100% trustworthy in that regard, simply because they might have missed something.
yeah i know the risk, but the headline implies the data was exposed to a hacker who tried the password 123456 but thats not the case. A security researcher was investigating the application and accessed a test application with the password 123456 then found an API call which exposed the data and then he instantly reported it.
load more comments
(8 replies)
Paradox.ai’s chief legal officer, Stephanie King, told WIRED in an interview. “We own this.”
I didn't know Stephen King changed gender and is working for AI company.