[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: mICQ roundup



On Sun, 16 Feb 2003 13:27, Emile van Bergen wrote:
> Frankly, it worries me that some people have such a hard time making the
> distinction. Are /you/ always on the border of doing something truly
> malicious after you slightly passed the line of what's considered
> acceptable behaviour? I sincerely hope not.

What do you think should be the criteria of acceptable behaviour?

You seem to think that sending an "obfuscated message" in the form of a 
time-bomb in code is OK.  What do you consider the border of being truely 
malicious?

BTW  If he had been paid for doing commercial work and had done that then the 
likely result is that he would end up with a criminal conviction, and maybe 
jail time.  Note that even if he had not been paid for such commercial work 
then that would not keep him out of jail.  Below are a few URLs with examples 
of this.

http://www.houghi.org/jargon/time-bomb.html
http://venus.soci.niu.edu/~cudigest/CUDS4/cud406.txt
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112292/2002/11/26.html

-- 
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: