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

Re: intrusion via ssh

Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@verizon.net> writes:

> On Friday 01 April 2005 22:05, John Hasler wrote:
>>Gene Heskett writes:
>>> With all due respect John, they really should be pressing charges
>>> against the perp who owned the box in the first place AND their
>>> network admin who probably wasn't keeping the systems fully
>>> patched.
>>"Should" is not a player here.  Besides, they can do all that _and_
>>prosecute you.  You "should" have a claim against them for allowing
>> their machine to be used to attack yours, but you'll get nowhere
>> with it.
> And there is definitely something wrong with that picture John, after 
> all, we are also victims of their negligent actions.

Thinking of grandma, I'm not sure whether it's always negligence proper.
Plus, when flattening her iron in a counterattack, I'd always be a little
anxious she might drop dead from heart attack. Maybe we need some kind
of 'computer driver's license' ... (not sure what the industry would say
about that, though)

Regards, Bruno.

Reply to: