SecurityFocus

Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Jan 22 2004 05:25PM
Richard M. Smith (rms computerbytesman com) (2 replies)

Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Jan 23 2004 03:28PM
Brian C. Lane (bcl brianlane com) (2 replies)

Re: [work] Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Jan 24 2004 06:46PM
opticfiber (opticfiber topsight net) (1 replies)

Re: [work] Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Jan 24 2004 08:27PM
Jonathan A. Zdziarski (jonathan nuclearelephant com)

Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Jan 23 2004 08:59PM
Kevin Reardon (Kevin Reardon oracle com)

Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Jan 23 2004 03:29AM
~Kevin Davis³ (computerguy cfl rr com) (3 replies)

Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Jan 24 2004 05:16AM
rsh idirect com

Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Jan 23 2004 07:58PM
Kirk Spencer (kspencer ngrl org) (1 replies)

Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Jan 25 2004 02:06AM
Crispin Cowan (crispin immunix com)

Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Jan 23 2004 06:48PM
Daniel Capo tco net br (2 replies)

Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Jan 29 2004 04:09PM
Mariusz Woloszyn (emsi ipartners pl) (3 replies)

RE: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Feb 03 2004 04:17PM
David Schwartz (davids webmaster com)

Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Feb 03 2004 02:56PM
Christian Vogel (chris obelix hedonism cx) (2 replies)

Hi Mariusz,

On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 05:09:27PM +0100, Mariusz Woloszyn wrote:
> Do you have an explicit permission to read the content of a www.cnn.com?
> What is the difference between opening a web URL and a network share?

i think "technical" people often think of the law-system as something
as C-code, as it's written there is only one way for a standard
compliant compiler to interpret it. I think the judges are more flexible
than gcc in this regard, they can also assume that one perfectly knows
that one is supposed to read http://www.cnn.com but not to read
http://qz25srv.competitor.com/internal/memos/strategy.doc (made up
example) even if -- from a technical standpoint -- there is no
difference.

They will most likely assume that it was very negligent for the
competitor to leave his business plan in the open and value this in
their decision, but nevertheless you should have known better than to
state "I thought it was meant to be published".

And yes, I'm normally also in favour of the technical viewpoint... :-)

Chris

[ reply ]

Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Feb 03 2004 08:06PM
Ron DuFresne (dufresne winternet com)

Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Feb 03 2004 04:13PM
Daniel Capo tco net br (1 replies)

Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Feb 04 2004 04:39PM
Thomas M. Payerle (payerle physics umd edu)

Re: [security] Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Feb 03 2004 04:02AM
rsh idirect com (1 replies)

Re: [security] Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Feb 03 2004 10:08PM
Bernie, CTA (cta hcsin net) (1 replies)

RE: [security] Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Feb 05 2004 11:41AM
Larry Seltzer (larry larryseltzer com)

Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Jan 24 2004 07:11PM
Dinesh Nair (dinesh alphaque com) (1 replies)

Re: Major hack attack on the U.S. Senate Jan 24 2004 08:32PM
ed the7thbeer com