Re: Proposal for removal of mICQ package
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003 09:54, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> 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
> worse.
I think that you are being unfair to crackers when comparing them to this.
I suspect that many (most?) crackers would not trojan their own software to
make a point.
I believe that under the laws of many countries a theft committed by an
employee will be punished more severely than the same theft committred by an
outsider. This is because they violated the trust put in them. I think that
the same thing applies here. Ruediger was trusted and violated that trust.
--
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Reply to: