On Thu, 7 Jun 2001, Zachary Uram wrote: > Oh I see. > So a machine(s) will be compromised through some mechanism > (trojan, virus, setuid exploit) and the intruder will setup > programs which are then uses to take control of machine and > employ in his orchestrated DoS atatcks yes? For the most part, yes, sometimes there's a layer of abstraction with a worm doing the compromise and setup. > Sort of like gun laws, more restrictive laws will still be > circumvented by criminals since by definition they don't observe > the law. So law abiding citizens pay the price. Same thing goes > on in insurance industry etc... Exactly. > > > making software vendors produce more secure systems would be of much more > > help. Reducing the social factors associated with people attacking > > How do you propose this awareness can be affected on a > national/global level? There are several ways, my preferred ways happen to be fairly biased to my employer's method of doing business, so I'll save everyone the commercial- we can take that bit to private e-mail if you'd like. > > systems wouldn't be a bad thing either. So far not many people have stood > > up to villify the bad guys- that needs to change. > > I agree. Nothing wrong with setting up your own network and > breaking into it for the learning experience. But defacing > other's property, theft of time/resources/money etc. is still > wrong both morally and legally. Yet only Marcus has really stood up and thrown stones so far. That's a damn shame. The press fallout and attention the bad guys get is astounding too- that needs to change, but probably never will. Paul ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul D. Robertson "My statements in this message are personal opinions proberts@patriot.net which may have no basis whatsoever in fact." - [To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@lists.gnac.net with "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]