upvote
If they did any damage that would be a reasonable argument. As far as I am aware, nothing bad happened.
reply
Regardless of exact practical outcome, it is deeply irresponsible and reckless behavior to run such security testing on other's infrastructure and without sufficient isolation. If they actually believe their models to be as powerful as the marketing says, then anything less than airgapping for such a "do anything to get the results" evaluation clearly isn't acceptable.

If the fire department suddenly had practice fires breaking containment, they'll be forced to stop pretty quickly, not sure what the government and the police is waiting for here.

reply
deleted
reply
CFAA laws do not require “Damage” to be done.
reply
They happen to require intent and are thus irrelevant here.
reply
I think you’ll find that negligence is indeed accounted for.
reply
"The fire fighting department really just hired an arsonist so they could market their fire fighting abilities!"
reply