full-disclosure - NINCOMPOOPERY OF MICROSOFT

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

From: guninski at guninski.com (Georgi Guninski)
Subject: NINCOMPOOPERY OF MICROSOFT

This user Bullmur should be carefull with the word "criminal".

Question to the lawyers on the list:
It is my understanding that "criminal" is someone who breaks the law.
microsoft seem to have been found guilty by a court in the antitrust trial, so they seem to have broken the law.

Are microsoft criminals from legal point of view?

Or does justice work this way: if you deface a website, you are a criminal, but if you screw most of the internet you are a hero?

georgi

On Wed,  1 Oct 2003 07:54:12 -0700
<dhtml@...h.com> wrote:

> "Hackers are criminals" Most, he notes, release their malicious code
> after patches for Microsoft software have been released, meaning that
> they are simply reverse engineering to exploit security weaknesses or
> holes in software. - Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer 
> 
> 'ninkum`poop [n]  a stupid foolish person See Also: simple, simpleton
> 
>