RE: Re: Ethics, morality and the industry

["Alan Holmes" <alan () tympaniinc com>]

Just curious,

In Mitnick's case, who were the victims that you would pay restitution to?
Not one of the corporations that claimed damages actually reported the
losses in their annual report. Based on that, Scott McNealey should be
sharing a jail cell with Martha Stewart and consequently no one should ever
listen to Mr. McNealey speak again, because after all, if he signed an
annual report that didn't reveal losses the size of what Sun claimed due to
Mitnick copying the source code then, he is a criminal.

The message I got from the original post wasn't whether reformed black hats
are good or bad or can even be reformed but that some people still have a
strong conviction in their own beliefs and are willing to forego $$$ in
exchange for standing behind those beliefs. I think that is a very admirable
trait and something that is quite rare today.

-----Original Message-----
From: firewall-wizards-admin () honor icsalabs com
[mailto:firewall-wizards-admin () honor icsalabs com] On Behalf Of Mark Teicher
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 1:19 PM
To: Paul D. Robertson; Paul Foster
Cc: firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com; jseanor () avaya com
Subject: Re: [fw-wiz] Re: Ethics, morality and the industry

Actually there is difference between Frank Abigale and Mitnick.  After
serving a portion of his time, Frank Abigale went to work in designing
systems that are currently in use today.  Mitnick, on the other hand, has
not contributed at that scale to help improve any of the systems he
supposedly broke into it, except to jump start a fledging security industry
in taking an interest in the types of ways Mitnick was successful in
defeating the security systems in place at the time.  The Telecommunications
providers have yet to make all the recommended security improvements that
allowed Mitnick to accomplish what he did.  Let's take a look at other
people who suffered the same sort of fate.  Intel vs Randall Schwartz
(1993), Randal spoke at SANS a while back about his case on "What not to do
as a System Administrator".  It was a very good talk, getting back on topic,
having former criminal speak at conference is not a crime, and they should
be rewarded for it, and there should be big statements, like this speaker's
honorium/fee is being collected to pay restitution to their victims.

/m

-----Original Message-----
From: "Paul D. Robertson" <paul () compuwar net>
Sent: Oct 29, 2004 1:16 PM
To: Paul Foster <Paul.Foster () dmtsystems net>
Cc: firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
Subject: Re: [fw-wiz] Re: Ethics, morality and the industry

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004, Paul Foster wrote:

> > To my mind the issue is that he's still *profiting* from  his crimes.
> > That doesn't do justice to the victims, nor does it send the right 
> > message IMO.  Crime should not pay.
>
> How so?  He talks about how he would exploit security systems, and 
> this is his area of expertise.  The guy spent many enjoyable years in 
> jail (on his knees?) which does not sound like 'crime pays' to me.

It's also his area  of criminality.  That's not a good message- there are
*plenty* of good guys who have the same expertise who haven't created
victims who can give out the same information.

It worries me socially that the royal we tend to put these folks on
pedestals when they're nothing more than confidence tricksters who have no
special information or skills.

> > I think that the fettering should include profiting from whatever 
> > badness the person did- hey, if he was lecturing on IPv6 security, 
> > then I don't see as much of an issue.
>
> Perhaps he doesn't know squat about IPv6.  If we prevent him from 
> legally earning a buck on issues he does know, we could inadvertently 
> be encouraging use of those skills illegally.

IMO, society would be better served if we *really* rehabilitated them.
Having them stand up in front of people and proclaim how great they were
when they were doing illegal activities seems to run counter-productive to
that to me.

He doesn't know squat about IPv6 because we're letting him cruise on
notoriety rather than making him go get a real job that doesn't profit from
his criminality.  And yes, if he's so bent on doing wrong than on doing the
right thing, then let's let him commit more crime, and lock him up again-
because that means he's not reformed and shouldn't be out of jail.

> > I hope that in the future, CSI chooses its keynote speakers more 
> > carefully.
>
> Should we bury our heads in the sand and not learn from people like this?

You can learn all there is to learn without paying them princely sums and
celebrating notoriety.  There's both more value in what Howard Schmidt and
Bill Murray say than in what Abignale and Mitnick say, and a better overall
message for the industry and society to send by using them.

Paul
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Paul D. Robertson      "My statements in this message are personal opinions
paul () compuwar net       which may have no basis whatsoever in fact."
probertson () trusecure com Director of Risk Assessment TruSecure Corporation
_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards



_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards



_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () honor icsalabs com
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards