I  had no idea what honeypot was,  I found this article and I thought it was 
cool .

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-11-526520.html?legacy=zdnn



On Monday 21 April 2003 08:03 am, Tim Fournet wrote:
> In that case, what's the difference between that and an Intrusion
> Detection System? I'm not sure if an internal machine could really be
> called a "honeypot" if it's got some protection in front of it.
>
> I really don't see the benefit of using a honeypot. To me, it seems like
> a lazy/irresponsible alternative to really securing your network. If
> your goal is to try to catch and prosecute criminal crackers, then
> you're likely doing more harm than good because any evidence you find
> will very likely be inadmissible in court. OTOH, if you're just doing it
> as an experiment, have fun. Just make sure you aren't inviting disaster
> to a production network.
>
> -Tim
>
> On Mon, 2003-04-21 at 07:35, Dustin Puryear wrote:
> > What if the system is put in the heart of your internal network? In this
> > way you could ensure that only someone that had penetrated your perimeter
> > defences could have access to the machine?
> >
> > At 09:35 PM 4/20/2003 -0500, you wrote:
> > >Using a honeypot to protect ones network is in my opinion negligent and
> > >irresponsible. Companies have a responsibility to do their best to keep
> > >their systems inaccessible to unauthorized users, and putting a "free"
> > >system on the internet that could potentially allow a cracker to launch
> > >attacks against others is not a good practice.
> > >
> > >Companies absolutely have a right to protect their systems, but not to
> > >the point of breaking the law to do it. I think anyone who willingly
> > >puts a machine on the internet that's configured to allow someone easy
> > >and full access to it--knowing that that person intends to do damage
> > >with it--is guilty of aiding a criminal and should be charged as such.
> > >Enforcing the law is not the duty of citizens and corporations.
> > >
> > >On Sat, 2003-04-19 at 22:48, Jeremy J Bertrand wrote:
> > > > I just read the article on securityforce.com. posssible loop-hole in
> > >
> > > using a
> > >
> > > > redirect, to redirect hacker traffic from a production system to a
> > > > honeypot the hacker could sue/countersue for misrepresentation and
> > > > entrapment. That goes for both the private company and the
> > > > government.
> > > > As far as the hackers getting in through other means beside telnet or
> > > > a webpage and how to notify there are numerous messages that you can
> > > > use to notify that the machine is being monitored.
> > > > But your right it is sickening. The fact that using a honeypot to
> > > > lure
> > >
> > > hackers
> > >
> > > > away from production machines could land you in prison. The fact that
> > >
> > > the act
> > >
> > > > hacking any machine is a felony should but doesn't protect the
> > > > company from litigation.
> > > > ??? I mean a company doesn't have the right to protect what is his
> > > > and
> > >
> > > so what
> > >
> > > > if he wants to use something that could help capture "wanted
> > >
> > > criminals", the
> > >
> > > > company should be rewarded for doing a good deed, but instead they
> > > > get litigation. Come on what kind of society have we created for
> > > > ourselves ????
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jeremy Bertrand
> > > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------- Original Message -----------
> > > > From: Nashid Hasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > Sent: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 11:10:07 -0500
> > > > Subject: [brlug-general] Use a Honeypot, Go to Prison?
> > > >
> > > > > These legal games are sickening.......
> > > > >
> > > > > "Using a honeypot to detect and surveil computer intruders might
> > > > > put you on the working end of federal wiretapping beef, or even get
> > > > > you sued by the next hacker that sticks his nose in the trap, a
> > > > > Justice Department attorney warned Wednesday."
> > > > >
> > > > > http://securityfocus.com/news/4004
> > > >
> > > > ------- End of Original Message -------
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > General mailing list
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >General mailing list
> > >[email protected]
> > >http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
> >
> > ---
> > Dustin Puryear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Puryear Information Technology
> > Windows, UNIX, and IT Consulting
> > http://www.puryear-it.com
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > General mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> General mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net


Reply via email to