Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email email@example.com
Date: Tue Oct 16 2001 - 17:35:38 CDT
> I meant victimless as in the comparison to murders, or terrorists. Hackers
> do *not*, repeat *do not* kill people. Terrorists do.
> Yes, you have a valid point, privacy is something to be respected. Back to
> the point of the discussion - hackers/crackers/script kiddies/virii
> writers/worm writers *all the 'nasties' of the internet* are *not*
I have kept out of this discussion on purpose, but here I must make a
If you are making a distinction of terminology, then that is one thing, but
you can't say that 'hackers' do not kill people as a statement of fact...
In other words, a terrorist could most certainly use hacking as a method of
causing death to people.
If a hacker disabled a town 911 facility, people would most certainly die
that would not have before. If a hacker disabled air traffic control
systems, people could die. If a hacker stole and published undercover drug
agent information, those men and women would die. Hospital records could be
changed, drug interaction information removed, and people could die from a
shot of Penicillin or Morphine. Automated automobile traffic systems, train
control systems, etc could be knocked out and people would die. Redirect
food and medical supplies from a starving village, and people would die. I
won't even begin to go into how much military operations and equipment are
controlled remotely via data systems that could be compromised.
Hacking is not always done by a kid on a DSL circuit. It could be someone
camped out on the telco grid. It could be someone at the airport
maintenance facility, it could be anyone, anywhere, doing all sorts of
things in all sorts of ways.
I would be careful before I made statements like that.
rm -rf /bin/laden