Re: McKinnon a 'scapegoat for Pentagon insecurity'

[n3td3v <xploitable () gmail com>]

On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 4:16 PM,  <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:
> For the record, although any single hacking case probably isn't the President's
> job, unless it's a highly visible one like the McKinnon case, the question of
> what policies/directives should be issued to deal with the general question
> *is* the President's job.

I'm talking about artificially ramping up something and giving a false
impression to a president just so you can get power and money should
be illegal.

What Marcus Sachs said in the Youtube video sounds illegal. He wants
to ramp up cyber security to make it something a president should
worry about, even though in its natural state he knows it isn't one.

Would that not come under some kind of fraud, to cheat and lie to a
president to get money from him for something that doesn't actually
need money for in its natural state.

Why should we let Marcus Sachs get away with it, when the evidence is
on Youtube.

Why don't the security community show the next administration the
Youtube video, and then Marcus Sachs would have no chance of getting
anything, because they will realise he is just lying and cheating, and
ramping up cyber security to be something that it isn't.

All the best,

n3td3v

-- 
https://groups.google.com/group/n3td3v

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/