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: Fri Jun  2 06:38:39 2006
From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu (Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu)
Subject: scanning

On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 00:34:35 EDT, Simon Smith said:

> who ran nessus against you but never penetrated your systems. From
> expereince, the FBI only takes interest in crimes that cause roughly
> $50,000.00 in damage or more. If you are below that mark or if they are
> too busy... you won't get jack unless you pay for it.

Note however that there is case-law precedent in the US where the costs of
investigation and clean-up can be counted toward the $5,000 requirement
in 18 USC 1030(a)5(B)(i).  The big gotchas there are the phrases "would have
caused" and "aggregated". 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00001030----000-.html

What's this mean? It means that if you scan some lame-ass system and it
crashes as a result, you might be in deep shit.  And "it shouldn't have
crashed from a portscan" does *not* hold up in court.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20060602/08b296df/attachment.bin

Powered by blists - more mailing lists