[47844] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Scott Francis)
Thu May 16 12:39:17 2002
Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 09:35:51 -0700
From: Scott Francis <darkuncle@darkuncle.net>
To: PJ <briareos@otherlands.net>, Dan Hollis <goemon@anime.net>,
"'nanog@merit.edu'" <nanog@merit.edu>
Message-ID: <20020516163551.GI50984@darkuncle.net>
Mail-Followup-To: Scott Francis <darkuncle@darkuncle.net>,
PJ <briareos@otherlands.net>, Dan Hollis <goemon@anime.net>,
"'nanog@merit.edu'" <nanog@merit.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-ripemd160;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="J+eNKFoVC4T1DV3f"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20020516011437.GB2239@elvander.otherlands.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--J+eNKFoVC4T1DV3f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 06:14:37PM -0700, briareos@otherlands.net said:
[snip]
> > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 05:22:39PM -0700, PJ wrote:
> > > Even more, I would hate to see the advocation of a hostile reaction t=
o=20
> > > what, so far, is not considered a crime.
> >=20
> > Feel free to go portscan some US military and federal interest networks=
,=20
> > then. If it's not a crime, you shouldnt have any problems scanning them.
> >=20
>=20
> If it's a crime, someone should have no problem citing the code. If
> it's not a crime, than I am guilty of nothing and should have nothing
> to fear. Of course, in the present political climate, that's
> probably not the case, but it doesn't make it right. However, there
> is legal precident that port scanning is not illegal. There are
Just because something is not technically illegal (yet) doesn't make it
justifiable, either.
> always going to be people who are going to probe and poke, as long as
> there is no direct harm, who cares? Sorry, the days of people sitting
There will always be people who probe physical security of banks and other
institutions, too. Such folk usually find themselves explaining their actio=
ns
to the nice officers in short order.
Just because something happens doesn't mean it should be condoned, or
accepted as unavoidable.
> in nice straight lines, only doing what you want them to do and only
> going where you want them to go are not yet upon us.
Agreed (I doubt that day will ever come).
> http://online.securityfocus.com/news/126
There is a difference between what's legally acceptable and what's ethical =
or
even prudent.
> PJ
--=20
Scott Francis darkuncle@ [home:] d a r k u n c l e . n e t
Systems/Network Manager sfrancis@ [work:] t o n o s . c o m
GPG public key 0xCB33CCA7 illum oportet crescere me autem minui
--J+eNKFoVC4T1DV3f
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org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=Vj5P
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--J+eNKFoVC4T1DV3f--
