T. Joseph Carter wrote:
On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 08:18:17AM -0400, Linux Rocks! wrote:I not only agree with this point, the fact that it was a very poor security decision was known
True! They went down last year because of an internet worm that effected
their database(s). There is no doubt it will eventually happen again,
next time it could be worse too... The peope effected with that worm
were behind in thier updates... BofA could have avoided thier problem.
I am firmly of the belief that someone should be held criminally responsible. The idiot who decided that Windows was a good ATM operating system.
by the people who are in charge of atm machine security. It was made at a corporate level (yet specific people voted or agreed to it). By constitutional law though those individuals are not legally responsible for the decisions they made because the corporations rights as a person sheild them from the consequences. Some amendment pushed through congress during a recess just before the turn
of the century allows this. If any effort to stop corporate abuses doesn't go after the obvious unconstitutionality of this "amendment" it is a wasted effort. I don't think anyone decided windows
is a good operating system it was probably presented in a way that made good dollar sense to executives.
"I almost have a hard time holding any attackers responsible for this kind of thing. That would be like painting your IP address and root passwd on a billboard along I-5."
I would hold the attackers responsible as well, even though it is an easy crime it is still a harmful act.
The bigger harm is done in the board rooms, in congress and at microsoft promotional events with movies of bill gates blasting demons with a shotgun.
J.F
_______________________________________________ EUGLUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.euglug.org/mailman/listinfo/euglug
