It was caught through review, and the defense claimed that he knew that would be the case and therefore he put no one at risk. I'd argue that systems can fail, review can fail, and if that happened people could have died. Giving him credit for that seems absurd, and his claim that he just wanted attention is equally absurd. If you just want attention the profanity and price changes would achieve that.
Regardless he wasn't convicted of any crime related to potential harm to customers, he was convicted for hacking and identity theft.
