Ashcroft's Anti-Terrorism Act may convict us all ...

[mattg at timesucker.ne.mediaone.net (Matt Galster)]

They do count web hits to addresses not known to be web servers, ftp hits, anonymous ftp esp. so.  Attempts to connect via telnet or smtp ports.  Almost anything that used to be considered completely innocuous.

MEG

> 
> Ron writes:
> | I certainly wouldn't advocate trying to crack .mil boxes in any case.  But
> | I would surmise that the fact script kiddies and their ilk /do/ attempt
> | such hijinks helps keep the sysadmins on their toes.  If no-one even dares
> | to poke at these machines, I can imagine an onerous degree of complacency
> | setting in - leaving .mil boxes just flapping in the breeze.  So when the
> | /real/ terrorists want to strike, they'll have easy pickings.
> |
> | But what do I know?
> 
> It seems to me that you have  a  pretty  good  understanding  of  the
> situation.   There is a long history of "shooting the messenger" when
> the topic is computer security.
> 
> Of course, the media do like to quote military sources who claim that
> their systems get hit millions of times per day. I've often suspected
> that they are counting pings as "attacks". I haven't seen any details
> that would convince me otherwise.
> 
> -
> Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with
> "subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the
> message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).
> 

-
Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with
"subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the
message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).