full-disclosure - If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it?

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: <4f0e191c041202064870490f28@mail.gmail.com>
From: krmaxwell at gmail.com (Kyle Maxwell)
Subject: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it?

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 03:47:06 +0000, n3td3v <xploitable@...il.com> wrote:
> Thought:
> Hey, thanks for the insight. I can't see Lycos introducing the
> screensaver without talking with legal teams first, so surely we can
> presume everything is legal and above board?! Otherwise, why would
> Lycos want to put themselves in a legal tangle? Unless they weighed up
> the legal costs against the profit they would make from the PR stunt,
> from which all I can see, is all this whole thing appears to be.

It's entirely possible that their lawyers cleared it but that doesn't
necessarily make it really above board; if lawyers always agreed on
what was allowed, we wouldn't have so many corporate lawsuits. :) They
may be standing on the principle of "these are just a bunch of website
visits" without taking into account the fact that there's a stated
intent beyond just visiting the sites.

This is probably going to get a lot messier for Lycos before it's all over.

-- 
Kyle Maxwell
[krmaxwell@...il.com]