Slashdot Mirror
Security Researcher Chases Virus Maker Off the Net
An anonymous reader writes "There is a great writeup over on CNET covering the pursuit of a virus writer who created a fake Grand Theft Auto game, crippling PCs by causing them to endlessly reboot. Despite the police apparently not being very interested, a security researcher pursued his man anyway, culminating in a teary eyed 'I'm leaving the internet' post from the virus writer himself. Awesome stuff, and one in the eye for the bad guys (for once)."
So some blowhard self-important jackass "security researcher" harassed a little kid and made him cry.
What a fucking loser.
Who, the researcher or the kid? Actions have consequences, and maybe this seems a bit harsh but the kid set himself up for it.
The simple moral is if you don't want people getting mad at you, don't be a jerk. Is that really so unreasonable?
The REAL virus writers/blackhats, the ones infiltrating multi-billion dollar corps, are working for the russian mob.
And how many of them would be doing it now if someone had tracked them down scared the shits out of them in their teens? I'm not saying that's the ideal approach to security, but then there is no single ideal approach; a spectrum of methods is necessary.
Go after them, I double dog dare you.
When the police start taking online fraud more seriously that might be an option. Going after the Russian mafia single handedly would be proof of utter stupidity.
Blank until
1/5th of the population already has herpes; 80% are asymptomatic. Males are more likely to be asymptomatic than females. The difference between type 1 and type 2 are also largely academic.. either *can* exist at, or around, most orifices. Despite the FUD surrounding the fact that there's no *cure*, treatment can manage symptoms quite effectively. Ethics aside, the flu would likely be a worse punishment.
Of course the idea that it's at all appropriate to intentionally infect someone with a biological virus in response to a computer virus is absurd. Speaking from experience, a couple of weeks in the poke is enough to get all but the most hardened individuals to re-evaluate their life choices, and I highly doubt most virus writers would fall into the category of hardened criminals.
Why not let the punishment fit the crime? They give you a data-scrambling virus, dose them up with mercury. They give you a virus that infects others, we give them herpes. Etc, etc...
So what does Bill Gates get? While some of his data scrambling has been accidental, much is intentional. The upgrade treadmill alone has cost more than any virus or trojan and it hits those who try hardest! Sabotage of other company's software has also cost millions of man hours. The problem with your method of punishment is that it must just suck to be Bill Gates. How can you get any crazier than to sit around dreaming of global software domination, smear campaigns and other strangeness M$ gets up to at his command?
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
"Anyone who lost money should have known better than to install random games from the Internet on their work machine."
You're an idiot.
I would argue that a guy walking around in gold chains in a bad neighbourhood (or a woman walking around in a skimpy outfit) may contribute to being beaten up, raped, robbed or even killed but I'd never argue the murders, rapists, or robbers should therefore go free because they should have known better. That kind of logic makes slums and moves us towards the law of the jungle.
A prank that causes financial loss should be punished. Despite your cavallier attitude to it, kids have always been getting into trouble including going to jail when pranks go wrong...and so they should. We all need to be responsible for our own actions. We don't get a free pass because we were being mischeivious.
You wouldn't react to a "prank" where some teenage kids trashed your house because you left your door unlocked by saying "oh well it was my fault, kids will be kids".
By the way in case you haven't noticed by the way things have changed. Kids use to call in bomb scares all the time. Do that in this day and age and prison is a real possibility. Why? Because it diverts resources from real risks and because it does society a lot of financial and emmotional damage. (We may have gone overboard in recent years but the principle that you're responsible for the results of your actions is a sound one).
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
So let me get this straight. Guy takes a poke at computer nerds by suggesting that computer nerds only get ugly women. And your comeback is, in essence, "Dude no way, I totally saw a cute girl once when I was 16!" Not exactly what I call a biting rejoinder...