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

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

Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.2.20031001160816.04bead60@pop3.direcway.com>
From: madsaxon at direcway.com (madsaxon)
Subject: NINCOMPOOPERY OF MICROSOFT

At 01:32 PM 10/1/03 -0700, Gregory A. Gilliss wrote:

>Reality - the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) likely will not even
>make the effort to prosecute computer crimes that cannot be said to have
>caused significant (like US$500,000) amounts of damage. It's just not
>worth the time and resources for them to assign people to port scanning.

Minor point: the reason the FBI is unlikely to investigate crimes
with smaller dollar amounts is because the US Attorney's Office
will not prosecute them.  Since the FBI is a federal agency, it
investigates federal crimes, and those crimes are prosecuted
by the US Attorney's Office. The FBI can only pursue cases with
the potential for successful prosecution, ergo the monetary
damage limitation (although it's more like $5,000 than $500,000).
Also remember that the DOJ generally only prosecutes felonies,
and these often have lower monetary boundaries.  That's why
it's very important if you want to bring in law enforcement
that you make a credible attempt at quantifying your losses first.

m5x