We Should All Step Back from Security Journalism

I don't see much of a legal framework in this post, which is a shame because it is about a legal topic.

For example the Pentagon Papers decision set precedent that reporters and editors can work with and publish information that would normally be illegal--in that case because it was classified--in the interest of informing the public. Examining a file of credit cards to see if it was from an authentic hack, in the course of reporting that hack, would seem to pretty obviously be in the public interest. People benefit from knowing when their data has been stolen.

Motive matters in criminal prosecutions. A reporter examining a file of stolen data in order to accurately report on it has very different motives from the original hackers who stole the data, or someone looking to sell it.

Barrett Brown worked as a journalist, but the actions for which he was convicted went outside the typical bounds of journalism. I question whether his conviction means much for reporters who stay in those bounds.