Well, it's certainly not without precedent http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/04/17/twitter_worm_job/
http://www.securityfocus.com/brief/595 http://www.sophos.com/pressoffice/news/articles/2000/09/va_cihauthor.html I'm sure there's other instances... On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Jason Ross <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Peter Evans <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> What's wrong with it? Really. He proved a point, it got him a job by >> getting his name out there. >> > > He broke the law of a number of countries by intentionally making > modifications to computing devices without authorization. Such behavior > Such behaviour is unethical at best. > >> >> In what way does it send the _wrong_ message? >> > > For performing the above action, he was rewarded with a job as an > application developer, sending the message to observers that behaving > in such a manner is a good way to secure your future. > To me, that's the wrong message. > > >> >> What will be interesting is how long he lasts. >> > > Till the press bubble surrounding him bursts is my guess. > Which means he's now got an incentive to continue acting irresponsibly > to ensure he remains viable. Again, not a good thing in my opinion. > > -- > jason > _______________________________________________ > Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. > https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec > Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list. > _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
