bugtraq - Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 15:56:30 +0100
From: Christian Vogel <chris@...lix.hedonism.cx>
To: Mariusz Woloszyn <emsi@...rtners.pl>
Cc: Daniel.Capo@....net.br, computerguy@....rr.com,
	BUGTRAQ@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate

Hi Mariusz,

On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 05:09:27PM +0100, Mariusz Woloszyn wrote:
> Do you have an explicit permission to read the content of a www.cnn.com?
> What is the difference between opening a web URL and a network share?

i think "technical" people often think of the law-system as something
as C-code, as it's written there is only one way for a standard
compliant compiler to interpret it. I think the judges are more flexible
than gcc in this regard, they can also assume that one perfectly knows
that one is supposed to read http://www.cnn.com but not to read
http://qz25srv.competitor.com/internal/memos/strategy.doc (made up
example) even if -- from a technical standpoint -- there is no
difference.

They will most likely assume that it was very negligent for the
competitor to leave his business plan in the open and value this in
their decision, but nevertheless you should have known better than to
state "I thought it was meant to be published".

And yes, I'm normally also in favour of the technical viewpoint... :-)

        Chris