What is the difference between the two hadiths that discuss dealing with the injustice of rulers and with those who assault one's property?

The difference between the two hadiths is that the first, Hudhayfah's hadith, necessitates obedience to the ruler and prohibits rebellion against him, even if he whips one's back or confiscates one's wealth, in order to prevent the disunity of Muslims and the occurrence of greater harm. As for the second, Abu Hurayrah's hadith, its intent is that an assailant attempting to seize wealth is a combatant who should not be given anything from it, even if it leads to fighting and killing him. The summary of the difference is that the first concerns the obligation of obeying the ruler despite the possibility of minor harm, while the second concerns the obligation of repelling an assailant who attacks one's wealth because it is a change of an evil.