On Thu, 7 Jun 2001, Zachary Uram wrote:
> Oh I see.
> So a machine(s) will be compromised through some mechanism
> (trojan, virus, setuid exploit) and the intruder will setup
> programs which are then uses to take control of machine and
> employ in his orchestrated DoS atatcks yes?
For the most part, yes, sometimes there's a layer of abstraction with a
worm doing the compromise and setup.
> Sort of like gun laws, more restrictive laws will still be
> circumvented by criminals since by definition they don't observe
> the law. So law abiding citizens pay the price. Same thing goes
> on in insurance industry etc...
Exactly.
>
> > making software vendors produce more secure systems would be of much more
> > help. Reducing the social factors associated with people attacking
>
> How do you propose this awareness can be affected on a
> national/global level?
There are several ways, my preferred ways happen to be fairly biased to my
employer's method of doing business, so I'll save everyone the commercial-
we can take that bit to private e-mail if you'd like.
> > systems wouldn't be a bad thing either. So far not many people have stood
> > up to villify the bad guys- that needs to change.
>
> I agree. Nothing wrong with setting up your own network and
> breaking into it for the learning experience. But defacing
> other's property, theft of time/resources/money etc. is still
> wrong both morally and legally.
Yet only Marcus has really stood up and thrown stones so far. That's a
damn shame. The press fallout and attention the bad guys get is
astounding too- that needs to change, but probably never will.
Paul
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Robertson "My statements in this message are personal opinions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] which may have no basis whatsoever in fact."
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
