Destroying computers
John Washburn
jwashburn at whittmanhart.com
Thu Jun 19 10:30:29 PDT 2003
Utah is Southern? I do not want directions from you. :-)
And as an aside why is Southern=Stupid. Most of the truly dense people
I have met in my life are self-righteous Yankees.
Southerners, by and large, will say "Idda know" instead of spout
foolishness.
-----Original Message-----
From: Major Variola (ret) [mailto:mv at cdc.gov]
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 9:42 AM
To: cypherpunks at lne.com
Subject: Re: Destroying computers
At 01:07 AM 6/19/03 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
> Methinks Mr Hatch is not a very bright man.
A Southern senator. Need I say more?
Usual suspect wrote:
>>If Orrin Hatch proposes such a thing, we can propose technologies
which
>>identify those from .gov or .mil or other Congress/Gov't. domains and
send
>>lethal viruses and suchlike back to them to destroy their machines if
they
>>illegally connect to our machines.
Trivial to do, and legal, if they are advised and consent by clicking
through.
M$'s auto bug- / RAMsnooping- reporting is legal since the lUsers
agreed.
One man's trojan is another's remote control / file sharing program,
baby.
Similarly an encryption program that won't decrypt without a license.
I have often considered releasing binaries with a EULA that stipulates
various actions taken if found to be running on machines whose IP
address
reverse-lookups to an evil, (specified) TLD. No different than a demo
program that won't save results without a license; if the license is
granted
automatically for non-evil TLDs. Similarly with M$'s auto posting of
RAM.
Of course, that astronomy Professor Usher would be pretty bummed when
his research was toasted by an RIAA killbot, but then the Prof employs a
provocatory surname, no? "Collateral damage" -hey, he could change his
name, after all. Maybe to David Nelson :-)
----
If programmers are liable for security flaws in code, are legislators
liable
for unconstitutional laws they pass?
More information about the cypherpunks-legacy
mailing list