[146397] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Firewalls - Ease of Litigation and Subrogation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (-Hammer-)
Thu Nov 10 13:22:35 2011
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 12:19:20 -0600
From: -Hammer- <bhmccie@gmail.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <24317277.2351.1320949189583.JavaMail.root@benjamin.baylink.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
You guys are hilarious. OK. I give up. It never happens. I'll leave this
thread alone.
-Hammer-
"I was a normal American nerd"
-Jack Herer
On 11/10/2011 12:19 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>> From: "Richard Kulawiec"<rsk@gsp.org>
>>
>
>> Right. I know you can't and won't. I can't either. So we can
>> summarily dismiss all the concerns about liability because they
>> have no relationship to reality. You will not be suing BigFirewallCo,
>> no matter how horribly their product fails, no matter how bad the damage is,
>> no matter how obvious to all of us the failure is, no matter how culpable
>> we might all agree they are, because (a) your pockets aren't as deep
>> as BigFirewallCo's, and (b) you'd probably lose anyway (c) after 11 years
>> and a lot of billable hours for everyone's attorneys. (s/you/I/ and
>> everyone else, unless we happen to work for a Fortune 50 company...and
>> probably not even then.)
>>
> Yeah, Rich, but come on: you and I -- and even his managers -- know that while
> that is true (that no one's actually going to sue anyone, and likely legally
> cannot anyway), that *still* won't keep Pointy Haired Bosses from making that
> *capability* a firm requirement.
>
> That's why their hair is pointy.
>
> Cheers,
> -- jra
>
