We did have a black bear in our city neighbourhood (Ottawa) yesterday (unfortunately shot by police) so unusual things do happen. -----Original Message----- From: firewalls-owner@Lists.GNAC.NET [mailto:firewalls-owner@Lists.GNAC.NET]On Behalf Of Bill_Royds@pch.gc.ca Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 13:10 To: Paul Murphy Cc: zu22@andrew.cmu.edu; kclausse@columbus.rr.com; youngba@more.net; webmaster@rbfcu.org; DGRIMES@scvl.com; firewalls@Lists.GNAC.NET Subject: RE: 3rd party liability Was RE: This is a must read document If people are regularily bludgeoning one another with garden gnomes in your neighbourhood and you have been warned not to leave one on your front lawn, perhaps you would be liable. But in my neighbourhood, it would be an unusual event so I would not worry. The point is not just that you create a situation that others use for a crime, but that you have been warned before hand by competent authorities. This is called "due care and diligence". This is why the RFC about ingress/egress filtering is important. Competent network authorities (the IETF) has warned about allowing bad packets to leave your leaf routers. If you now still don't filter, you can be liable for the resultant damage from your network. You wouldn't be liable 2 years ago becuase you hadn't been informed. "Paul Murphy" <paul.murphy@crestco.co.uk> on 06/12/2001 10:39:10 AM To: zu22@andrew.cmu.edu, kclausse@columbus.rr.com, youngba@more.net, webmaster@rbfcu.org, DGRIMES@scvl.com cc: firewalls@Lists.GNAC.NET(bcc: Bill Royds/HullOttawa/PCH/CA) Subject RE: 3rd party liability Was RE: This is a must : read document Its an interesting use of law. I was thinking about getting a garden gnome for my front garden which has an implied accessability. Ie mailmen and visitors are allowed into the front area so that they can get to my front door to deliver or call. Hence I have little security to prevent people getting in, just a gate. I am getting worried that if I have a garden gnome in my front garden and a psychopath wanders in and uses it to bludgeon someone to death that I might be charged as an accessory through negligence. For those of you metaphorically challenged, this is a metaphor. I haven't read the entire thread but I presume similar examples have also been posted. This goes to show that this thread will never ever die. Thanks, Paul. >>> "Grimes, Dean" <DGRIMES@scvl.com> 6/12/2001 02:02:34 pm >>> Actually, I think this has already happened. I remember reading in the paper or seeing it on the news a number of years ago (early 90's or late 80's) about a woman who left her car running while she ran into a convenience store for just a minute. In that minute her car was stolen and used in a bank robbery. During the get-away, the perps hit someone and other things with the car. Now, I don't believe she was charged criminally for the bank robbery, but she was sued in civil court for damages wrought during the get-away. She lost that case for the very reason stated in the article. In addition, her insurance refused to pay for damages for the same reason. You can go to any search engine and search keys+car+running+stolen and find a number of cases where the person was either held liable or negligent for that very thing. It is, therefore not too much of a stretch to assume that similar action could be taken against home computer users. Will it happen? I don't know. -----Original Message----- From: Webmaster [mailto:webmaster@rbfcu.org] Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 1:02 PM To: Claussen, Ken; 'Zachary Uram'; 'Young, Beth A.' Cc: firewalls@Lists.GNAC.NET Subject: Re: 3rd party liability Was RE: This is a must read document Ken, To clarify, you say that if I leave my keys in the car and the door unlocked and someone steals the car and kills someone with it, I'm partially liable? That's stretching it a bit...I think the burden should fall squarely on the shoulders of the person that stole the car. Please don't think that this means that *every* situation like this is the same. But I don't think we need to start putting the folks that can't remember to tie their shoes in jail... Michael Sorbera Webmaster Randolph-Brooks Federal Credit Union ----- Original Message ----- From: "Claussen, Ken" <kclausse@columbus.rr.com> To: "'Zachary Uram'" <zu22@andrew.cmu.edu>; "'Young, Beth A.'" <youngba@more.net> Cc: <firewalls@Lists.GNAC.NET> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 11:30 AM Subject: RE: 3rd party liability Was RE: This is a must read document > ***Disclaimer I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV**** > First I agree with the author's perspective, people should be held > accountable for their actions, or inaction. My understanding of the article > was if you had the club on the car then you upheld the "reasonable > expectation" of personal protection and therefore would not be "Held > liable"(read negligent) in this case should a crime be committed. A better > analogy would be to say if you left the keys in the ignition and the door > unlocked and someone then used your vehicle to commit a "Hit and Run" that > there is a far greater likelihood your actions would be found negligent and > you could be held accountable. In other words if you provided easy access > to the "Weapon" for a third party, then you are as much as fault as the > person who committed the crime. Hence the potential to be charged as an > "accomplice" to a murder. Same applies to computers, if you enable "File and > Print sharing" and do not take measures to protect yourself, IE a Virus > scanner and/or (IMO both should be required) personal firewall then > essentially you have left the keys in the ignition and the doors unlocked. > Anyone for a joyride? > > Ken Claussen MCSE CCNA CCA > Ken@kccweb.com > "The Mind is a Terrible thing to Waste!" > > > -----Original Message----- > From: firewalls-owner@Lists.GNAC.NET > [mailto:firewalls-owner@Lists.GNAC.NET]On Behalf Of Zachary Uram > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 10:59 AM > To: Young, Beth A. > Cc: firewalls@Lists.GNAC.NET > Subject: Re: 3rd party liability Was RE: This is a must read document > > > this is silly position but understandable considering we live in > most litigitous country in the world. > this is analogous to saying if you don't have "The Club" on your > car you are liable if someone steals it and commits a crime. > > > > uram@cmu.edu > "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have faith." - John 20:29 > > - > [To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@lists.gnac.net with > "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.] > - > [To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@lists.gnac.net with > "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.] - [To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@lists.gnac.net with "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.] - [To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@lists.gnac.net with "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CRESTCo Ltd. The views expressed above are not necessarily those 33 Cannon Street. held by CRESTCo Limited. London EC4M 5SB (UK) +44 (020) 7849 0000 http://www.crestco.co.uk --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - [To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@lists.gnac.net with "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.] - [To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@lists.gnac.net with "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.] - [To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@lists.gnac.net with "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]