On Tue, 04 Sep 2001 21:54:13 +0300, Cristian Burneci wrote:
> "Helmut Usbeck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> try to figure out what this one is.
> After extracting the attachement from the digest and decoding it, naming it
> "virus_decodat", (too much work for a virused file :-)) this is what I've got:
<snip>
> IMPORTANT! In the future try and do not send any more viruses explicitly
> attached. This is a the equivalent of a crime ... even supposing that many of
> the people on this list do not use Win9x on a regular basis.
> Cristian Burneci
Not all viruses and worms sent in emails arrive in the form of an
attachment. Go to a good anti-virus site and read about the KAK worm.
It is a crime to transmit a virus or a worm by email knowingly and
intentionally and deliberately. Unless we can produce evidence
indicating that Helmut's sending of a virus was a deliberate act, then
we should treat the incident as an accident. Most people who send
viruses do so unknowingly. Helmut has done some bad things by
insulting us and by spamming the list. Just because a person is known
to do some bad things doesn't necessarily mean that he is inclined to
do some far worse things. We may well suspect him, but I don't think
we can make a case against him for anything worse than spamming us. We
know that he did send us a virus also, but I don't think we can show
that the act was deliberate. Maybe it is possible that he received a
strange file type that he could not identify, and he quite innocently
asked us if we could figure out what is was. If he were to use this
kind of defense it is unlikely that anyone could prove him to be lying.
Cases based merely on some prosecutor's opinion that the defendant "knew
or should have known" don't sit very well with the jury unless the
prosecutor can present evidence to back up such an argument. Helmut may
easily wriggle out of our accusations simply by claiming to be ignorant.
Regards,
Sam Heywood
-- This mail was written by user of The Arachne Browser - http://arachne.cz/
