|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
To: "andrew.wallace" <andrew.wallace@rocketmail.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:53:39 BST." <4b6ee9310907291453y6da24d19l21cc5345bd8f08a2@mail.gmail.com> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 13:09:37 -0400 Cc: nanog@nanog.org Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org --==_Exmh_1248973777_3306P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:53:39 BST, "andrew.wallace" said: > The hackers criticized Mitnick and Kaminsky for using insecure > blogging and hosting services to publish their sites, that allowed the > hackers to gain easy access to their data. *yawn*. kiddies whack low-value sites, death of Internet predicted. Film at 11. What Mitnick and Kaminsky realize, and most NANOGers hopefully do too, is that security comes with costs, and a cost-benefit analysis is in order. Mitnick came out and *said* that he knew the site was insecure, but since no sensitive data was on there, it didn't matter. Presumably the site's monthly cost, convenience, user-interface, and so on, outweigh the effort of occasionally having to recover after some idiot whizzes all over the site. Now, if they had managed to whack a site that Mitnick and Kaminsky *cared* about, it would be a different story... --==_Exmh_1248973777_3306P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQFKcdPRcC3lWbTT17ARAhx9AJ4ufFUvHBOsfm+FNyfid70qfT8OLwCg9Qb6 b0FwFB2lqD56fdVFsrKnOVk= =lTHm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_1248973777_3306P--
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |