I find your article to be very shortsighted. Why do we patch, and release service packs for operating systems? We do it to make them safer and more secure. So now what you want to do is to turn the tables and become that which we hate. That which causes us no ends of stress. And why? To get back at all the bad little hackers and script kiddies? What happens when your jab back at them ends up hitting the admin down the street from you because he is not as "studious" as you are about watching out for vulnrabilities? Now all the sudden YOU are the worm writer. YOU are the bad guy. And lets take another look at your comments about an admin putting a "destined to be owned" box on their network.

"Yet if an administrator who could not secure a bowling ball without leaving at least three holes decides to put a destined-to-be-owned box on the Internet, justice turns a blind eye when it attacks my network, consuming resources and bandwidth. "


Im sorry, but any box that is put on a network with a live IP is going to get hit with something. In 2001 Microsoft released over 60 critical hotfixes/patches for Windows 2000. If you do the math thats over 1 a week. And those unix/linux bandwagon people out there who are point your finger and saying "seeeee", dont think that unix/linux doesnt have JUST as many holes and vunlrabilities as a Microsoft product.

This will probably never see the author of this article's eyes. Judging from his writing he is plenty self-rightous enough to not look at any of the comments he may see in dissention to his view. But if you do see this Mr. Mullen it would be nice of you to go find yourself an admin who doesnt "neglect his dog", and find out just how much time it takes to keep up with all of the crap, the everyday, underpaid, real world admin has to deal with.


/Rant Off


[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/98/15993#15993