RE: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] network scanning?

["McNutt, Justin M." <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

> *shrugs* Once someone decides to turn you into a criminal there is no
> reason not to do it all the way. Therefore if someone applys 
> bad doings to
> you you may as well make them true and add to it. If you're 
> doing anything
> might as well do it all the way -- even being a criminal.

In for a penny, in for a pound?

Remember that someone scanning YOU (which was the original scenario) doesn't
incriminate you in the least.  If you return the scan, you are then breaking
the law.

And continuing to break the law will only make the prosecutions life easier
and lengthen your sentence (yes, people are facing jail time for net
scanning).

> If machines crash from being scanned they need to be taken off the
> net. Any weak machine is a security risk to everyone and not just the
> owner. *shrugs* Probably right that the law doesn't care but oh
> well.. scanning systems is certainly less dangerous than 
> speeding so it
> should have a lesser punishment.

All of these arguments were had a while back and are fallacious (mostly).  I
agree that weak machines that die from scans should be taken off of the
network until they can be fixed, but that isn't always feasible (suppose the
'machine' in question is a router!).

Don't assume that crashing a machine is less dangerous than speeding.  That
evaluation requires two specific cases and has to be evaluated each time.
Depending upon the nature of the machine that crashes and the nature of the
car accident, many more people can be hurt by a crashed machine.

Unless, of course, you're doing 120 and you smash into a diesel tanker next
to a HAZMAT-processing facility...  :-)  I'd say that pretty much wins all
the time...

--J
--
To manage your subscription, go to http://mlug.missouri.edu/members/edit.php

Archives are available at http://mlug.missouri.edu/list-archives/