Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Calls Viruses "Industrial Terrorism"

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the emotional-appeal dept.

evenprime writes: "John Ashcroft wants congress to declare computer crimes to be terrorism, and now it looks like microsoft is trying to jump on the bandwagon. In a recent column discussing microsoft's new STPP security program, microsoft's Michael Lane Thomas stated that destructive viruses should be recognized as acts of 'industrial terrorism.' Sounds like microsoft's future security plans may depend more on legislation than on code audits."

9 of 473 comments (clear)

  1. Naturally by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you call it a virus, then you have to deal with it yourself. Microsoft has repeatedly shown an inability to handle such things. If you call it terrorism, it's the government's responsibility.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  2. nimda et al by wiredog · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I found it interesting that nimda was released a week, almost to the minute, after the WTC attacks. Certainly if I were a cyber terrorist I'd launch something like nimda or code red that gave me a list of compromisable systems. I'm surprised that the people who launched the attacks on CNN didn't get hit with terrorism charges. This'd be a very good time for the skript kiddiez to lay low. How do you tell the difference between and idiot script kiddie and a cyber-terrorist?

    --

    Best Slashdot Co
  3. Terrorism by cluge · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Usually terrorists have some political goal. Even Anarchists have a goal. What exactly is the political motivation for l33t h@x0r from albania that wrote nimda?


    Oh yeah, piss Bill Gates off and get more boxes to DOS yahoo with. Damn silly of me not to see this political movement. I wonder do they have a PAC (political action comity) yet?

    --
    "Science is about ego as much as it is about discovery and truth " - I said it, so sue me.
  4. There's a spectrum here... by BillyGoatThree · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I would say that some viruses ARE terrorism. What about the big ol' DDoS we had a year or so ago? It was a smallish group targetting a list of victims for political means. Sounds like terrorism to me.

    And can we really blame the architects of the WTC for not making the building plane-proof? No, I think they performed "reasonably" well.

    So, hypothetically, if a software company took reasonable precautions and had a good record concerning quality and THEN had their software hit by a non-obvious virus I have no problem with the label of terrorism or the use of legislation.

    What'd be really sweet is to turn this back on Microsoft. Get the congress-critters to define "reasonable precautions" and "non-obvious virus" and then only afford protection to MS if they clean up their act (i.e. fix Outlook, IIS and the macro system at the very least).

    --
    324006
    1. Re:There's a spectrum here... by Phrogz · · Score: 4, Interesting
      And can we really blame the architects of the WTC for not making the building plane-proof? No, I think they performed "reasonably" well.

      Actually (my wife is an architect) the buildings WERE designed to be plane-proof...as long as the plane was a 707 or smaller and not loaded with as much fuel as the 9/11 planes were. Here's a story where the architect is quoted. You just have to set limits somewhere (as is your point) as to how far you can go. You obviously can't design the building to withstand the equivalent of a kiloton of TNT...I mean, sure you could, but it simply wouldn't be practical.

  5. Wrong Buzzword by FortKnox · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yes, Virii writers and script kiddies should be punished, but "Terrorists"??

    New virus comes out. You know it can happen to you. Do you fear for your life so as not to turn on the computer????

    Terrorism is starting to become a buzzword, but it is a state of combat (a step below guerilla warfare) where you have the finances and a small group of men to do some small damages, but not enough to do "hit and run tactics" (guerilla warfare).

    How about using another word and lay off the terrorism?

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
  6. bin Laden's Corrolary to Godwin's Law by Frank+Sullivan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As an Internet discussion grows larger, the probability of a comparison involving terrorism or bin Laden approaches one.

    (see http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/Godwi n's-Law.html)

    Sigh.

    --
    Hand me that airplane glue and I'll tell you another story.
  7. Harboring Terrorists by Merk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Couldn't MS code then be said to harbor terrorists? Or couldn't it at least be said to supply terrorists needs? If terrorists take over airplanes once, the US government wants to mandate steel cockpit doors. Since "terrorists" regularly take over computers running MS pructs, shouldn't the same government force MS to replace their ultra-flimsy "cockpit" doors?

  8. What Microsoft doesn't know... by gillbates · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is that this legislation - making computer crimes terrorist acts - would undoubtedly incur legal liability on their part. If computer crimes are terrorist activities, then Microsoft is an accomplice by extension - they not only provide the terrorists with the tools of the trade, but specifically engineered virus weaknesses into their products. Thus, they could be tried in the same manner as the UNIX programmer who wrote a backdoor into the system. Interestingly, a EULA can't shield Microsoft from criminal liability.

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.