It's not about following the law with suspect motives. It's about the fact that following the technical protocol does not give you much defense against unlawful access charges.
I was responding to the naked phrase "technically allowed," which in hindsight is ambiguous (ie, "allowed under the law via a technicality," or "technologically feasible").
Rereading, I still think I interpreted correctly the first time, but really can't be sure.
