Re: Proposal for removal of mICQ package
>>>>> In article <[🔎] 20030214080010.GA11005@evbergen.xs4all.nl>, Emile van Bergen <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Let's judge the offence at hand and not speculate about the
> perpetrators mind set and the possible future much worse offenses
> resulting from that.
> This sounds *way* to much like "Sure he wasn't guilty of /that/,
> but I'm estaaablishing a pettern of behaaaviour here, y'r honor".
Fine. This particular cracker hid a poison pill in the
program, which would attempt to evade developer checks, and, at a
point in time, trigger to deny the use the services of the
program. Denial of services trojan, rahter cleverly
disguised. Still, the upstream is a cracker, and next time, he'll do
Old MacDonald had an agricultural real estate tax abatement.
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C