Laptop Jockey
Intern
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2021
- Posts
- 78
Thankyou Eminere.Yes, see here.
Thankyou Eminere.Yes, see here.
Same. Don't think the site is all that great. Given in the same incident Vietnam airlines is mentioned but not Qantas.Qantas says my details hacked, but the haveibeenpwned site report zero hacks on that email.
As mentioned above, it’s because of the injunction. The site isnt allowed, legally, to publish that information.Same. Don't think the site is all that great. Given in the same incident Vietnam airlines is mentioned but not Qantas.
AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements
Thanks. I didn't connect those dots. I think such action is shameful. Publishing actual personal data - of course. But 'banning' publication of information about whether that data has been used, is treating us with contempt.As mentioned above, it’s because of the injunction. The site isnt allowed, legally, to publish that information.
Ah. Never realised it was operated under an Australian ABN.It's clearly owned and operated by an Australian entity, the geographic location of the hosting is irrelevant AFAIK.
What I suppose they’re trying to stop is someone accessing the data… from DV cases through to celebrities or other categories… and publishing that. One thing to be on the dark web, but most of us wouldn’t access that.Thanks. I didn't connect those dots. I think such action is shameful. Publishing actual personal data - of course. But 'banning' publication of information about whether that data has been used, is treating us with contempt.
I was listening today to a cyber expertWhat I suppose they’re trying to stop is someone accessing the data… from DV cases through to celebrities or other categories… and publishing that. One thing to be on the dark web, but most of us wouldn’t access that.
Has Qantas actually told its members that their data has now been published and to exercise caution, change x,y and z or would they prefer to hurry their heads in the sand and pretend everything is happy days?
is treating us with contempt.
Has Qantas actually told its members that their data has now been published and to exercise caution, change x,y and z or would they prefer to hurry their heads in the sand and pretend everything is happy days?
Yes, sort of.Has Qantas actually told its members that their data has now been published and to exercise caution, change x,y and z or would they prefer to hurry their heads in the sand and pretend everything is happy days?
It's more than "reproduction", it isYeah. I also thought the court injunction was to prevent reproduction of stolen data in the public sphere. Not to prevent an alert website from - you know- alerting people now and into the future.
publishing, transmitting, disclosing or using any of the material which has been taken from Qantas’ servers without Qantas’ consent, and requesting the defendants to remove immediately all such material from any accessible location on the internet.
I would’ve thought ‘reproduction’ covers that, but thanks for the clarification.It's more than "reproduction", it is
Qantas Airways Limited v Persons Unknown - NSW Caselaw
www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au
So Qantas can, if they wish, consent to emails (only) being "used" to inform blah blah. Qantas could even be proactive (It's more than "reproduction", it is
Qantas Airways Limited v Persons Unknown - NSW Caselaw
www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au
Yes - request ack with a statement that they will recontact in the future. Release of the data is the next step in the chain of events that will allow class action to proceedHas anyone actually registered for the class action