From: cmacfarlane at Drummond-Miller.co.uk (Cassidy Macfarlane)
Subject: FW: Shadowcrew Grand Jury Indictment

I'm sorry - I have re-read this email, trying to understand your
position, however, I cannot avoid seeing this as a troll. Chld abusers,
whether on- or off-line, cannot be compared to 'hackers', regardless of
their hat colour preference. 

I do not believe there is anyone on this list who would condone Child
pornography. We are interested, and employed in the field of Computer
Security.  This sometimes involves full disclosure - If a financial
services website is repetetively hacked and defaced, due to poor
security, it is a 'Good Thing'(tm) for this fact to be made public, ie
published on a website.  If I understand your position, you would not
want this information made publicly available, as it would be 'for other
hackers to get a kick over' (quote)

This list is dedicated to the disclosure of Computer Security-related
information, and exploits and vulnerability details are regularly posted
(amidst the politics :) - would you have this list (and it's archives)
closed down also?

Agree with the charter or unsubscribe.

Thanks

PS - it is widely accepted that the type of people you are referring to
are known as 'crackers' - not 'hackers' - I am a 'hacker', and I have
never defaced a commercial web site.

/me whistles innocently

-----Original Message-----
From: n3td3v [mailto:xploitable@...il.com] 
Sent: 17 November 2004 23:19
To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
Subject: Re: FW: [Full-Disclosure] Shadowcrew Grand Jury Indictment


On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 13:29:19 -0700 (MST), Bruce Ediger
<eballen1@...st.net> wrote:
> Unfortunately, the US Government operates under the auspices of a
small
> document called "The Constitution", and a little concept called
"Common Law".
> Now, I know that you trendy kids call things like that "quaint" (I
believe
> that's what our new Attorney general calls things like the Geneva
Convention.
> See
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/06/13/wguan13.
xml&sSheet=/news/2004/06/13/ixworld.html)
> but fortunately for the rest of us, "presumption of innocence" remains
> the standard of the land.
> 
> If you small-minded totalitarians don't like that sacred principle,
get
> the hell out of the US.  We don't need your kind. Move to some Banana
> Republic where they change the rules all the time in the face of 1000
> years of tradition and philosophy and the Blood of Patriots who died
to
> protect these rights.
> 
> "Zero tollerence".  What will these doofuses think of next?  I bet
they
> start up a cult of personality around the nation's leader, including a
> new salute borrowed from the Romans.

I don't live in the U.S thankfully, I live in a sane country called the
U.K

Would you agree with closing down a site that was letting child
abusers to post links to illegal child porn photographs? Would the
site owner be able to say, we aren't involved with any of these links,
we just provide the site for the criminals to do it, so other child
abusers can get links easy to child porn photos.

But no, when we move onto online malicious hacker crimes, its ok for
sites, such as zone-h, which allows malicious hackers to post links
for other hackers to get a kick over, just like a child abuser would
by visiting a child porn photo.

Imagine a child abuse site which also kept a score board of the
biggest amount of child porn photo posters. Yet again we move onto
malicious hacker online crimes, it seems to be different for zone-h to
keep scores of the biggest malicious hacker defacement posters.

Why one rule for one online crime promotion site and not the same rule
for another online crime promotion site? I guess you would allow a
child porn promotion site, like you think its ok for zone-h to be
online promoting online malicious hacking and not closed down.

Thanks,n3td3v
http://www.geocities.com/n3td3v

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists