__/ [Robert Newson] on Saturday 31 December 2005 19:59 \__
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> Anthony Scott Clark, 21, of Beaverton admitted to working with several
>> other people to take control of 20,000 computers. According to the US
>> Department of Justice, Clark in 2003 exploited a vulnerability in
>> Windows - big surprise there - to gain access to the computers and knock
>> eBay and other sites offline via DDoS (distributed denial of service)
> Shouldn't MS be held accountable to Aiding and Abetting him in his
> misdemeanor be distributing the software with the 20,000 computers with the
> ability to be remotely controlled by him? Especially seeing as they knew
> about virus problems and exploits used by them back in the MSDOS days.
I once initiated a thread about this in uk.legal. Most people said that a
case could not be made.
You could blame the ISP for harbouring infected machines and an attacker that
uses them as puppets. You could also be bitter about search engines that
often motivate such attacks. As for Microsoft, their licences probably
defend them somehow. No doubt their products are destroying cyberspace.
I used to think of Windows as a benevolent poor product in existence -- one
that I should not mind as long as I don't get sent proprietary formatted
files by an authority, or get rejected by sites for not using Internet
Explorer. The attacks on my sites changes my perspective. I want Windows
dead, or at least fixed(1). *sigh*
(1) Fixed in terms of functionality and/or stability is wishful thinking.
Good 'Net citizenship' is a separate matter. Linux routers continue to
deliver E-mail and Web traffic which is spam which originates in infected