full-disclosure - Re: Cisco's stolen code

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: <20040526213613.GP5612@surreal.seattlefenix.net>
From: benjamin at seattlefenix.net (Benjamin Krueger)
Subject: Re: Cisco's stolen code

* On Someday, May 99, 2004 at 35:22:18PM +4200, Everone wrote stuff:

A confidential, copyrighted, and incriminating document is leaked out of a major institution
and in to the hands of a journalism organization. The document is intensely scrutinized by
that organization and a few experts they bring in. They break the story to the public along
with the document.

Is anyone liable for copyright violation? If so, who? Is there any case law establishing a
precedent for prosecuting the leaker and/or the journalists who broke the story? Are there
any protections offered under any whistleblower legislation, such as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act?

-- 
Benjamin Krueger

"Give me ambiguity, or give me something else!"