Reply From: <anon> On Mon, 2 Nov 1998, John Vranesevich wrote: > reading the article, I found it to be disappointingly superficial. They > did these hacks "because they were bored and couldn't agree on a video > to watch." Whatever... I was hoping that this interview would delve > into the minds of the HFG a bit deeper. Judging from the apparent savvy of HFG, I would imagine they chose to remain intentionally vague in order to avoid the potential of any FBI profiling. (Although it should be noted that HFG gave away a lot of information in their HTML comments of the various mirrored hacks I've seen.) > It's obvious that these guys aren't your stereotypical "crackers" as > this report seems to suggest. I think their motives are far more > complex than that. I would be curious to find out what the HFG's > reaction to this article was, and if they were given the opportunity to > review it before it went to print? I would personally be shocked if HFG did another "up periscope." That they even talked to the media seems curiously out-of-step with their apparent way of doing things. (Of course, I should note that I was shocked that HFG hit the New York Times since I figured they would vanish after they hit JPL/NASA.) > Also, I found it somewhat scarry that Adam mentioned the "3 room condo". > Talk about helping the FBI narrow down their suspect list a bit, huh? Um...doesn't Carolyn Meinel live in a three room condo? -o- Subscribe: mail majordomoat_private with "subscribe isn". Today's ISN Sponsor: Repent Security Incorporated [www.repsec.com]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Apr 13 2001 - 13:09:57 PDT