Jason Coombs wrote: > Viral vs. non-viral is an unimportant distinction -- if you choose to engage > in this business, be sure you can document your good intentions and your > legal forensic procedures because they are your only legal defense against > prosecution. > > Persecution, on the other hand, is a given. Oh, I dunno. I think it would be a lot harder to make a case for innocent intentions if the code were written in viral/worm form. In this instance, what *appears* to be under discussion is a technique for process hiding. That's not even an exploit per se. On the whole spectrum of programs that someone might take offense to, that's not too bad. I think that the question of viruses and worms came up only because the person who made the discovery assumes that malicious code would be the main consumer of such a technique. I wish I could simply roll my eyes at your statement that releasing an exploit or technique might make one an accessory to a crime, but sadly I fear your concern now has a basis, and I can't dismiss it outright anymore. BB
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 24 2003 - 08:33:38 PST