[108337] in Cypherpunks
RE: Eskimo North: The Anti-Privacy "ISP"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Peter Capelli)
Fri Feb 12 16:16:31 1999
From: Peter Capelli <pcapelli@nsec.net>
To: "'cypherpunks@cyberpass.net'" <cypherpunks@cyberpass.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 15:49:42 -0500
Reply-To: Peter Capelli <pcapelli@nsec.net>
> Sounds like the first thing you did was to start probing
> their system for
> security holes. Of course you didn't do this with the idea
> of exploiting
> any vulnerabilities you found, but just to see how well maintained the
> system was.
>
> It's still an unfriendly act. If you find someone coming up to your
> house and trying all the doors to see if they're locked, probing the
> windows to see if they can be forced open, etc., then you're not going
> to be happy, even if he says he's just checking to see how well you
> secure your residence.
Not a good analogy at all. A better one is this; he's renting
an apartment (he has paid them money, right?) Wouldn't you want to know
that the locks work on your apartment building, and that noone can break
in? I think so!
>
> You should get permission from the owner of a system before
> acting like
> an attacker.
He's not a guest, he's a member. He paid his money, and he's
testing their system to make sure it suits his needs. A very valid
policy.
>
> What was your next step going to be? Run Satan against it? When does
> the owner get to object?
>
He can object if you start to cause harm, or take sensitive
info, or the like.
-pete
Pete Capelli - NSEC - pcapelli@nsec.net
"Those who would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve
neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin, 1759
PGP Key ID:3AD72805
