nanog mailing list archives
RE: Port scanning legal
From: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer () mhsc com>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 12:40:51 -0800
From: Dan Hollis [mailto:goemon () sasami anime net] Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 12:26 PM
The argument against port-scanning applies equally well tojust about everydiagnostic tool we use.Only by the most convoluted thinking.
Let's see, we *are* talking court cases and lawyers here ... what was that you said about convoluted thinking? When was th last time you argued with an attorney, either in or out of court? When was the last successful time?
Current thread:
- RE: Port scanning legal, (continued)
- RE: Port scanning legal Roeland Meyer (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal Shawn McMahon (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal Dan Hollis (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal L. Sassaman (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal Majdi S. Abbas (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal Shawn McMahon (Dec 19)
- RE: Port scanning legal Roeland Meyer (Dec 19)
- RE: Port scanning legal Dan Hollis (Dec 19)
- RE: Port scanning legal Steven J. Sobol (Dec 19)
- RE: Port scanning legal Patrick Evans (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal Andrew Brown (Dec 20)
- Re: Port scanning legal Shawn McMahon (Dec 19)
- RE: Port scanning legal Larry Sheldon (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal J.D. Falk (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal Steve Sobol (Dec 19)