Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it?
From: n3td3v <xploitable () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 03:47:06 +0000
On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 22:22:30 -0500, KrispyKringle <krispykringle () gmail com> wrote:
Not being a lawyer, I still think you've missed the point. The defense Lycos is using is NOT that these are spammers sites, so this is somehow legal--it would not be. Vigilantiism is never legal; you would never be able to defend something that would otherwise be criminal as legal simply because it is being done against a criminal. The defense they are using is that it is a fundamental principle of the Internet that one can visit a Web server, and that to visit the server many times--even at risk of denying service--is not illegal. The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/1030_new.html) forbids one to, among other things, ``knowingly cause the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally cause damage without authorization, to a protected computer,'' which pretty much covers viruses and other malware. This would appear to apply to the Lycos software as well, given that it ``causes damage without authorization to a protected computer.'' So that is the key point, one that has not, to my knowledge, been tested in court. I'm actually unable to find anything more specific regarding DoS attacks in the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, but I don't know much more about what laws govern these actions. The CFAA seems to be focussed on unauthorized access, not denial of service. Of course, there's also the civil common law issues, specifically whether it is negligent of Lycos to distribute such a program. IANAL.
Thought: Hey, thanks for the insight. I can't see Lycos introducing the screensaver without talking with legal teams first, so surely we can presume everything is legal and above board?! Otherwise, why would Lycos want to put themselves in a legal tangle? Unless they weighed up the legal costs against the profit they would make from the PR stunt, from which all I can see, is all this whole thing appears to be. Overview: An investment to break the law -maybe- vs making lots of money and get lots of public attention for new e-mail signups. From which many will signup to the premium mail services. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it? n3td3v (Dec 01)
- Re: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it? KrispyKringle (Dec 01)
- Re: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it? n3td3v (Dec 01)
- Re: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it? Kyle Maxwell (Dec 02)
- Re: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it? Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 02)
- Re: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it? n3td3v (Dec 01)
- Re: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it? James Tucker (Dec 02)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it? Adam Challis (Dec 02)
- Re: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it? Ansgar Esztermann (Dec 02)
- Re: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it? Constantin Hofstetter (Dec 02)
- Re: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it? Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 02)
- Re: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it? KrispyKringle (Dec 02)
- RE: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it? Michael R. Schmidt (Dec 04)
- RE: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it? Dave Horsfall (Dec 05)
- Re: If Lycos can attack spammer sites, can we all start doing it? KrispyKringle (Dec 01)