Re: [inbox] Re: Supporters urge halt to, hacker's, extradition to US

["Miller Grey" <vigilantgregorius () gmail com>]

Legally, is there any precedence that private systems owned by the
government are public domain?  Furthermore, has there ever been any legal
precedent that any private system, if left unsecured, is in the public
domain?

Either way, I hark back to:

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/09/brits-us-passed.html

This whole thing has been blown way out of proportion...c'est tout



On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:33 PM, n3td3v <xploitable () gmail com> wrote:

> Dead right, you got your systems accessed by 'the public', because the
> systems were 'public domain'.
>
> Your systems were public domain, get over yourselves and stop arguing about
> it.
>
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 2:25 AM, Miller Grey <vigilantgregorius () gmail com>
> wrote:
> > Wrong...dead wrong.
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 2:10 PM, n3td3v <xploitable () gmail com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 8:07 PM, offbitz <offbitz () gmail com> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:48 PM, n3td3v <xploitable () gmail com> wrote:
> > > > > The systems were 'public domain' because the door was open.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Proof or GTFO.
> > >
> > > No passwords were set = public domain.
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/