RE: [iwar] News
From: Ralph E. Wasmer Jr.
From: wazzer@flinthills.com
To: iwar@egroups.com
Mon, 17 Apr 2000 09:34:05 -0500
fc Mon Apr 17 08:00:15 2000
Received: from 207.222.214.225
by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0)
for fc@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 17 Apr 2000 08:00:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by multi33.netcomi.com for fc
(with Netcom Interactive pop3d (v1.21.1 1998/05/07) Mon Apr 17 15:00:09 2000)
X-From_: sentto-279987-299-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com Mon Apr 17 10:00:03 2000
Received: from mq.egroups.com (mq.egroups.com [208.50.144.79]) by multi33.netcomi.com (8.8.5/8.7.4) with SMTP id KAA18203 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 2000 10:00:03 -0500
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-299-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com
Received: from [10.1.10.36] by mq.egroups.com with NNFMP; 17 Apr 2000 15:00:08 -0000
Received: (qmail 9576 invoked from network); 17 Apr 2000 14:38:14 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m2.onelist.org with QMQP; 17 Apr 2000 14:38:14 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO qh.egroups.com) (10.1.2.28) by mta2 with SMTP; 17 Apr 2000 14:38:12 -0000
Received: (qmail 9929 invoked from network); 17 Apr 2000 14:38:12 -0000
Received: from konza.flinthills.com (64.39.200.1) by qh.egroups.com with SMTP; 17 Apr 2000 14:38:12 -0000
Received: from [64.39.201.52] (fh-201052.flinthills.com [64.39.201.52]) by konza.flinthills.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA02132; Mon, 17 Apr 2000 09:38:10 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender: wazzer@pop.flinthills.com
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <10F6484D1E7FD3119B8C00902727A34501BE4A18@csoc-mail-box.csoconline.com>
To: iwar@egroups.com
Cc: "'iwar@egroups.com'"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: list iwar@egroups.com; contact iwar-owner@egroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@egroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe:
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 09:34:05 -0500
X-eGroups-From: "Ralph E. Wasmer Jr."
From: "Ralph E. Wasmer Jr."
Reply-To: iwar@egroups.com
Subject: RE: [iwar] News
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
At 8:15 AM -0500 4/17/2000, Leo, Ross wrote:
[some deleted]
>
>As I said then, the hiring of a "white hat hacker" or a reformed hacker is a
>risk I can avoid, and so I do. It is never a matter of being sure someone
>is a crook or not - it is a matter of whether they prove themselves to be
>completely trustworthy or not. It is the element of uncertainty that
>dictates my course toward assuming less risk, and avoiding unnecessary ones.
[some deleted]
In the whole Leo may be right, however, this same logic if applied to other
types of events, does not sound as good.
The 13 year old that steals a bike, is s/he not to be reformed?
The person who has an accident with the car and some one dies, and thus
that person is convicted of a "killing" - who wants to hire a murder?
I think this is a larger issue and needs to be looked at for more than an
once bad.
Who among us can say that we have never done anything "wrong"? What Intel
group or agency wouldn't love to turn an asset from the Dark side (which
ever that side really is) to the truth and the White side?
Is this issue simple, no.
Is this issue easy, no.
How do you deal with it? On a case by case basis.
Having hired a lot students, in the technical support area, I find that at
some time, some place, some how, they all have tried something.
The only thing I know is that I have an open mind about this, and do take
each person and treat them as a person. Is that right for me. Yes. Is it
right for you? Is it right for everyone one? I do not know.
Having been an User Group supporter since the early days of the Apple
][/TRS80 computers - I do not think that this issue of hacking is a white
or black hat issue. I think it is a billion shades of gray.
Also, consider this, if the law prevents you from holding a criminal record
against a job candidate, a real HR nightmare. Could you be sued by the
ex-hacker for being discriminated against? What a mess? What a mess.
Anyone on the list have any HR training? What is the results? What could
happen?
Worms, Can full of, Grey, Metal, OPEN...
Or how about buying software from a vendor that hacks you from the get go?
MS SECURITY FLAW CALLED "PINHOLE" - ZDNN 04/14/00
By Robert Lemos
Call it the case of the disappearing security hole.
Initial reports of a "back door" in Microsoft Corp.'s FrontPage server
software -- a deliberate
security hole put in to allow illicit access -- now seem to be, for the
most part, incorrect.
While Microsoft admits that a security flaw does indeed plague a software
module in its Web server
product, the giant software company contradicted statements by one of its
managers confirming the
existence of a back door with the pass phrase "Netscape engineers are weenies!"
"Microsoft now has all the information, and we confirm there is a
vulnerability in the product," said
Microsoft spokeswoman Luisa Vacca. "But it is a really, really minuscule
vulnerability. In no way is it
a back door in the product."
Just some thoughts.
Have a good day and a better tomorrow.
"If you once forfeit the confidence of your fellow citizens, you can
never regain their respect and esteem. It is true that you may fool all
of the people some of the time; you can even fool some of the people all
of the time; but you can't fool all of the people all of the time."
-- Abraham Lincoln, from speech at Clinton, Illinois, September 8, 1858.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Win $1000 at eGroups!
Enter "$1000 Fridays" at:
http://click.egroups.com/1/2862/7/_/595019/_/955983607/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------
http://all.net/