> 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. I have kept out of this discussion on purpose, but here I must make a comment. If you are making a distinction of terminology, then that is one thing, but you can't say that 'hackers' do not kill people as a statement of fact... In other words, a terrorist could most certainly use hacking as a method of causing death to people. If a hacker disabled a town 911 facility, people would most certainly die that would not have before. If a hacker disabled air traffic control systems, people could die. If a hacker stole and published undercover drug agent information, those men and women would die. Hospital records could be changed, drug interaction information removed, and people could die from a shot of Penicillin or Morphine. Automated automobile traffic systems, train control systems, etc could be knocked out and people would die. Redirect food and medical supplies from a starving village, and people would die. I won't even begin to go into how much military operations and equipment are controlled remotely via data systems that could be compromised. Hacking is not always done by a kid on a DSL circuit. It could be someone camped out on the telco grid. It could be someone at the airport maintenance facility, it could be anyone, anywhere, doing all sorts of things in all sorts of ways. I would be careful before I made statements like that. --------------------------------- Attonbitus Deus rm -rf /bin/laden
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Oct 17 2001 - 11:29:45 PDT