Date: Sun, 08 May 2005 01:40:49 +0200 From: Alex de Kruijff <freebsd@akruijff.dds.nl> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Mailinglist privacy: MY NAME ALL OVER GOOGLE! Message-ID: <20050507234049.GC1896@Alex.lan> In-Reply-To: <1183634761.20050507133237@wanadoo.fr> References: <20050506105433.GA84877@orion.daedalusnetworks.priv> <2410174336.20050506130648@wanadoo.fr> <73834c0c2b28ff7e6a7cb7542d1e453e@chrononomicon.com> <1345420086.20050506204229@wanadoo.fr> <20050507010013.GF3564@Alex.lan> <1047713602.20050507030814@wanadoo.fr> <20050507012802.GI3564@Alex.lan> <335856051.20050507044416@wanadoo.fr> <20050507110343.GA1647@Alex.lan> <1183634761.20050507133237@wanadoo.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 01:32:37PM +0200, Anthony Atkielski wrote: > Alex de Kruijff writes: > > > So? As long as your system is protected by a password nobody has a legal > > defence. > > Unfortunately they do. For example, if they guess a user name and > password and it works, they can enter your system and claim that they > believed it was okay because nothing told them otherwise. You have to > specifically advise them that they must be authorized, otherwise if they > accidentally or deliberately enter the system through a technical > compromise, they can defend themselves on this basis. They can claim all they like, but that doesn't mean this hold up in cord. In the Netherlands one who enters a protected system deliberate and unlawful can get half a year of jail time and a fine of about two thosend euro's. The law doesn't say anyting about warning that need to be displayed. Lets say I've lost my key to my house and someone else found it. This still doesn't give that person the right to use it to gain access to my house. Of course if there where some technical compromise disabling the need for the username/password then they whould be home free. But this technical compromise could also effect the message. > > A admin that doesn't put up a warning like "breaking in is a criminal > > act" is not at fault legaly or otherwise. > > Not at fault, perhaps, but he does leave the door open to certain types > of compromises. Leaving the door open would mean not require a the user to enter there name and password.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050507234049.GC1896>