All right what happened to basic morals. If it doesn't belong to you, don't touch it. If you didn't ask and/or I didn't tell you it's ok, you don't have permission. The default rule is deny. Exception given to possibly to a breach at the border of the domain(maybe). Just in case we're led to believe you may have been mistakenly at the wrong address, then you only did it once right? I mean you didn't hang around to go through the drawers and cabinets, open the fridge and grab a soda, you immedately exited, correct? When did this become lawfull? When did it become acceptable to walk into some elses home just because the door was unlocked and especially if it was? How can someone sue you for defending yourself if they get hurt? When did it become a joy ride to drive a vehicle with the keys left in it knowing it doesn't belong to you? Answer these questions and you'll start to see how such a concept could even be perceivable. I think an even greater debate would be that of automated counter attack.

Personaly I can think of no excuse for using cracker tactics on a system or network that does not belong to you, including the honey pot. Used as a defensive tactic the honey pot is usually placed on the network behind the production system and traffic is only redirected to it in responce to an intrusion attempt. I can speak for myself and many others of a group of honey pot users that it is not our intention to catch false alarms or the casual mistake in identity. Therefore the threshold for what would be concidered malicious activity is set rather high, even to say it's over relaxed.

The honey pot for us is not used as an evidence medium, but rather a resource tool. Allowing us to create a better offensive, by countering the actions taken against the honey pot.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/articles/4004/19494#19494