You are correct to say a DDoS and a nuclear blast are widely different in scale. However, I do believe they both qualify as weapons of mass destruction in their own realms. Relatively speaking, a network attack is just as dangerous in cyberspace as an air raid is in real life.
For example, if you knocked out a critical part of the power grid, you could cause starvation if supermarkets and residences lost refrigeration, and consequently, food
Actually, cyberspace is becoming as much a part as our national infrastructure as are roads, power plants, and other facilities.
Considering also that billions of dollars fly through the internet in the form of e-commerce every day, a botnet launching a DDoS on a few websites can cause as much damage as a terrorist bombing a bank. Probably more so.
The classification is novel, yes. Perhaps a bit premature, but certainly not a bogus one.
I think you're forgetting that debt works both ways.
It would be just fine if you got off from your creditors just as thoroughly as your debtors got off from you.
Unfortunately, a good chunk of this debt crosses international borders, and I seriously doubt that foreign countries would play ball with such a maneuver.
A bank account is not simply a debt for the bank. You have the right to withdraw from it on demand, on top of the fact that you can use it to write checks off of.
It's not just a loan to the bank, it's your money.
I'd consider it more of a constructive trust than a debt, if anything.
I think there's some merit behind the convictions.
Fraudulently entering a computer system for the express purpose of harassing someone is IMHO no better than breaking into a computer to steal IP or crash the system.
It's pretty much cyber-burglary. "Entering a domain with the intent to commit a crime therein", except in this case the domain is a computer system.
I hope the courts get the precedent right though.
If breaking TOS is a federal offense, then boo for elevating a civil tort to a criminal offense.
Slashdot Mirror
You are correct to say a DDoS and a nuclear blast are widely different in scale. However, I do believe they both qualify as weapons of mass destruction in their own realms. Relatively speaking, a network attack is just as dangerous in cyberspace as an air raid is in real life.
Don't forget that ISP's are typically tree structured, and that knocking out the root routers can fuck things up for the entire tree below them.
For example, if you knocked out a critical part of the power grid, you could cause starvation if supermarkets and residences lost refrigeration, and consequently, food
And I suppose that people who don't lock their doors deserve to get burglarized right?
Stupidity has its penalty, but it doesn't justify the offense.
Burglars are still burglars even if the door isn't locked,
and hackers are still hackers even if the firewall doesn't block them.
Actually, cyberspace is becoming as much a part as our national infrastructure as are roads, power plants, and other facilities.
Considering also that billions of dollars fly through the internet in the form of e-commerce every day, a botnet launching a DDoS on a few websites can cause as much damage as a terrorist bombing a bank. Probably more so.
The classification is novel, yes. Perhaps a bit premature, but certainly not a bogus one.
SpamCop would nitpick about commercial needing to be a part of it.
Plus, you may have made a mistake.
An announcement about school closure may be solicited through the consent inherent in being a resident in the given area.
The chain-letter emailing may, however, count as spam.
Which raises the question...
Who decides what is and is not spam in the first place?
Didn't we already give large wads of cash to the private sector for a backbone that never materialized?
I think you're forgetting that debt works both ways.
It would be just fine if you got off from your creditors just as thoroughly as your debtors got off from you.
Unfortunately, a good chunk of this debt crosses international borders, and I seriously doubt that foreign countries would play ball with such a maneuver.
They had something like this back in ancient israel, where creditors forgave their debtors once every 7 years, and every 50 years they had a jubilee.
A bank account is not simply a debt for the bank. You have the right to withdraw from it on demand, on top of the fact that you can use it to write checks off of.
It's not just a loan to the bank, it's your money.
I'd consider it more of a constructive trust than a debt, if anything.
The 3-4G hole is the 32-bit analogue of the 640k-1M hole on 16-bit systems.
I agree.
A piddly ass civil RICO suit isn't good enough.
Seriously, the gov needs to start going after these fucks.
I would LOVE to see something come out of MediaSentry's hearings.
It's almost like china is doing the international version of wardriving.
On the other hand it works quite well to emphasize that the RIAA is a pack of evil scumbags.
If it should be thumbed at, it should be for redundancy, not for lack of meaning.
Not to mention that Opera aced the Acid3 test.
IMHO, that's high praise indeed for a browser.
Nothing wrong with google getting a big fat share of the pie.
It has more need of calories to burn.
People use google ALL THE TIME, so it's like the queen bee in a hive. Give the most important things the most resources.
I don't know if that would be safe.
Who knows where they've already been?
...sites log onto you!
TFA says microsoft may have had a hand in this.
Why am I not surprised?
Except in this case the gun is in a case with a defective lock.
It isn't the customer's fault if their OS is full of holes.
Disobeying an executive order has consequences of its own.
I seriously doubt that every telecom went with this willingly.
I'd bet my bottom dollar that a good few of them got forced into it through the likes of NSL's and stuff.
With our lame duck president on his way out, impeachment is moot.
We need to just let this go. The guilty parties are already dead, so it's nothing more than a tragedy.
Please insert girdir
Makes me wonder why you're an EX employee.
Did you have some sort of beef with the company?
I think there's some merit behind the convictions.
Fraudulently entering a computer system for the express purpose of harassing someone is IMHO no better than breaking into a computer to steal IP or crash the system.
It's pretty much cyber-burglary. "Entering a domain with the intent to commit a crime therein", except in this case the domain is a computer system.
I hope the courts get the precedent right though.
If breaking TOS is a federal offense, then boo for elevating a civil tort to a criminal offense.
Creating a false identity to harass a minor... Hmm...sounds like stalking.
She killed herself over it? Possibly manslaughter or the like.
She's guilty, but they convicted her of the wrong crimes.
Violating a website's TOS is a tort at worst. Only if you defy an explusion/banning does it become trespass.