Charges dropped against pentesters paid to break into Iowa courthouse
At first, I assumed I was going to be only angry at the justice system, but after understanding the contract document was split in 3 with very wishy/washy language, part of the problem is on the contracted company.<p>This is why you have explicit language in your documents. It's not there for when things go well - it's when things go bad  like this situation. In fact, I argue this is an expected outcome. How can you run a security contract that does explicitly illegal things w/o having clear language about what is supposed to happen.<p>FWIW:<p>- The pen testers should be ready to spend time in jail and be compensated as such. A piece of paper should not get you off free immediately. That thing needs to be verified, so expect it to take time.<p>- Language in your doc needs to be clear exactly what will happen. The whole fiasco afterwards should not needed to have taken place. If the customers want 'more pen testing' charge them for it.<p>Overall this is a great outcome. Just need to clean up the edges a bit.