I don't think anyone is pointing the finger at the perpetrator. We?re just trying to justify the merits of the act itself. Weather the individual steps forward and admits guilt is one thing weather he was encouraged is yet another. Again if there is no documentation or paper trail then the perpetrator bears sole responsibility.

I wish you folks would re-read your posts and look at what you?re saying. Let me give you an example of what I understand you to say. If someone one leaves their door open it?s ok to go in due to ?poor configuration?.

First of all I find this a deplorable statement from any IT person. Second, if this is true then it?s wrong to prosecute anyone who exploits an unpatched system.

So according to the responses here, if I can see your computer after clicking network neighborhood, or if I can somehow logon to your Windows9x/ME computer from the internet then I can have whatever I find?

If you really think that?s a valid argument (and I?m sure he/them are reading this forum trying to figure out the best defense) then by all means they have every right to use that defense in court. Personally, I hope they use it and win, I?ve been looking for an excuse to change jobs since I?m close enough to the end of this one to retire.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/219/25090#25090