RE: Civil Disobedience

From: br0ken halo (x_burningat_private)
Date: Tue Oct 16 2001 - 07:22:36 PDT

  • Next message: Blue Boar: "Civil Disobedience Thread"

    I meant victimless as in the comparison to murders, or terrorists. Hackers 
    do *not*, repeat *do not* kill people. Terrorists do.
    
    Yes, you have a valid point, privacy is something to be respected. Back to 
    the point of the discussion - hackers/crackers/script kiddies/virii 
    writers/worm writers *all the 'nasties' of the internet* are *not* killers. 
    They do not belong in federal prison. Yes they are 'cyber criminals', and 
    yes they do violate privacy.
    
    Not everyone brought in this world has the best intentions and wants to 
    'live and let live.' Thus we have criminals. In a perfect world we wouldn't 
    need computer security because everyone would respect each others right to 
    privacy. That just isn't the case - so if your a sysadmin, and you don't 
    take the right steps to secure your computing enviroment, and you get owned, 
    then well, either your in the wrong business or you should have done a 
    better job. Thats how the world is.
    I wish it wasn't like that - even so, i still can't justify sending a kid to 
    federal prison (even if for a short lil' visit with mr. bubba)
    
    -- James
    
    ___________________________________________________________
    I live in a world of Paradox - My weakness` are your
    strengths, your wisdom is my stupidity, and your victorys
    are my losses, a victory that won't last.
    ___________________________________________________________
    
    
    
    ----Original Message Follows----
    From: Rick Koenig <rk4028at_private>
    To: 'br0ken halo' <x_burningat_private>
    Subject: RE: Civil Disobedience
    Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 17:11:34 -0500
    
    I know that this is a very touchy subject and is one that will be debated
    for years to come.  Which is why I will only make one comment.  To say that
    hacking is a "victimless crime" is absolutely absurd, whether its defacing
    or something a seemingly innocent as looking at information.  The bottom
    line is that there is a victim whose basic rights to privacy are violated.
    And peoples right to privacy must be protected, at all costs.  Or else what
    are we fighting so hard to preserve?  And every hack or attempted hack is a
    direct attack on an individuals/ organizations right to privacy.  Would you
    like somebody looking through your wallet or worse yet searching your home.
    I think not and its because you value your privacy.  I will never understand
    why we have to distinguish between electronic and physical privacy.  There
    is no distinction privacy (to a certain extent) is our right and it must be
    protected, at all costs.  And those that are opposed to this bill need to
    take a long look at why they are opposed. It can't be because one of your
    basic freedoms have been taken away.  It's probably because you are actually
    scared about the consequences you'll face if you get caught.  If that's the
    case then the LAW has done its job.
    
    Rick Koenig, CCNA, CCAI
    Network Engineer
    Concordia University @ Austin
      (Office) 512.486.1170
    (Cell) 512.771-6570
    (Fax) 512.302.5856
    
    
    
    _________________________________________________________________
    Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Oct 16 2001 - 10:25:41 PDT