[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ba3b5a380809301847h3265946alb2b085629361a56@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 20:47:42 -0500
From: "Miller Grey" <vigilantgregorius@...il.com>
To: n3td3v@...glegroups.com
Cc: info@...egary.org.uk, full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: [inbox] Re: Supporters urge halt to, hacker's,
extradition to US
Legally, is there any precedence that private systems owned by the
government are public domain? Furthermore, has there ever been any legal
precedent that any private system, if left unsecured, is in the public
domain?
Either way, I hark back to:
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/09/brits-us-passed.html
This whole thing has been blown way out of proportion...c'est tout
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:33 PM, n3td3v <xploitable@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Dead right, you got your systems accessed by 'the public', because the
> systems were 'public domain'.
>
> Your systems were public domain, get over yourselves and stop arguing about
> it.
>
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 2:25 AM, Miller Grey <vigilantgregorius@...il.com>
> wrote:
> > Wrong...dead wrong.
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 2:10 PM, n3td3v <xploitable@...il.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:07 PM, offbitz <offbitz@...il.com> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:48 PM, n3td3v <xploitable@...il.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> The systems were 'public domain' because the door was open.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Proof or GTFO.
> >> >
> >>
> >> No passwords were set = public domain.
> >
>
Content of type "text/html" skipped
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists