Norman Bottom wrote:
>>Ron DuFresne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>. . . . If someone walks up to yer home, raps on the door, and even
twists the knob,
>>though enters not, has a crime been committed? What if they walk about
the house and >>check em all, including the garage attached or not to the
house? Has a crime really >>been committed?
>COULD BE -TRESPASS AND ATTEMPTED BURGLARY
It's not trespass unless you can prove criminal intent, or you have a sign
up that says "No Solicitors", or you are a member of a militia that lives in
Hayden Lake, ID, where everyone has a fully automatic weapon and they don't
like anybody else (which, in all probability, includes you). Attempted
burglary? From turning a doorknob? I'm afraid to ask, but - under what
legal system are you bound?
>>. . . . Now, if I sit across the street, or in front of your house and
stare in your >>windows, watch your comings and goings and the comings and
goings of all your family >>and friends have I committed a crime?
>COULD BE - LOITERING WITH CRIMINAL INTENT; HARASSING; STALKING
I hardly think sitting in a parked car constitutes "loitering with criminal
intent". If you're thinking of staring in someone's window all day, chances
are a Cop will come by and ask you to leave before you get too far. It's
not harassment unless you can prove someone harassed you. It's not stalking
unless someone follows you.
Thank heavens for "innocent until proven guilty".
Now as for port scanning, while I am clearly a neophyte from the technical
side of things, I have had my share of legal battles, and unless someone can
prove malicious intent, while I am not an attorney, I cannot imagine a
State's Attorney going after a firm for having some internet user (which may
be a bot) that had the firm's address in it's packets (which may have been
spoofed) simply checking their ports to see which ones responded. I am not
arguing as to whether it was or wasn't against "the law". There doesn't
seem to be any prima facie evidence implicating any people or
corporation(s). Any good lawyer for the defense will argue that that the
"logs" were simply keyed in by the plaintiff and thus are "hearsay". If you
have a datascope recording packets whizzing by, *maybe*. Otherwise - end of
complaint.
Litigation? <ears perking up> Did I hear litigation? Let's assume you'd
get past a Motion to Dismiss and the subsequent Summary Judgement pleas.
Now you're in a big-money situation (in all probability a minimum of $100k)
to argue that "they" (whoever they are) "Did Not Have The Right To Do That"
(tm). And maybe "they" didn't. So, the question that begs asking is, "What
are your damages?" When the Judge asks that, what do you say? That they
turned my doorknob? That they looked in my window? That they hurt my
feelings? That they consumed 0.0000003 sec of router cpu time? That they
sucked up 1ms of DS0 / T1 / T3 line time?
I am certain we are being scanned, in all probability from hackers,
Pro-Lifers, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, The Knights of
Malta, conservative groups opposed to diversity and other assorted nutcases
/ phreaks. So what? Our defense mechanism tells 'em "None of your biz".
If I base our response on the concept of Individual Responsibility, then it
seems to me that it's up to us to ensure that we don't have a Trojan
somewhere inhouse that replies "use port xxxx and waste us". If we get
wasted, I can blame others, call the gov, litigate, ad nauseum, but at the
end of the day, *I have let it happen*. The buck stops here.
While I am not pleased that people are scanning us, I try to remember that
humans are, in one case, like CPUs: we only have so much "processor power"
to go around. I prefer to save our "let's git the bastids" energy for the
time when someone does something *really bad*, like tries to exploit a hole
that a Trojan may have found. Then there will be, in all probability,
damages. Then we would have a case. Hopefully, that day will never come.
Looking at it from that point of view, I'd rather spend the money - maybe
even serious change - beefing up, reworking, double- and triple-layering our
defense mechanism, than very large sums chasing people who will, in all
probability, never be caught. What was that bromide? "An ounce of
prevention ...?"
Cheers,
Yvette
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Miss Yvette Seifert Hirth, CCP, CDP Voice: (847) 263 6800
The DBT Group, Inc. Fax: (847) 263 6801
176 Ambrogio Drive Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gurnee, IL 60031 WWW: http://www.dbtgroup.com
New World Dictionary entry:
"Fundamental Christianity" - the idea that there is an all-knowing,
all-seeing, all-powerful, universe-spanning entity that for some
yet-to-be-explained reason is interested in my sex life.
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
