Was I almost hacked?

[Oren Beck]

Greg Kedrovsky wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 03:24:10PM -0500, jcrowe at cmuonline.net wrote:
> 
>>Nope, it's a worm.
>>
>>http://isc.sans.org/diary.php?date=2004-07-28
> 
> 
> Ah. Thank you.
> 
MY patience for malware writers is *** G O N E ***  !
And so It becomes a viable question to now ask something of our technoid 
social ethics .
It may be rhetorical to state but I would love to see anyone actually 
justify the authoring of malware that is _intended_ prima facie to cause 
havoc -let alone possible deaths .

While sympathetic that irresponsible and insane threats of violence are 
a  quite readily understandable consequence aroused by damages that 
malicious code cause I propose a  more ethical but draconian punishment .

IF we hesitate at actively harming those who write malicious code what 
then of the theological concept termed
  " Shunning "  Which stripped of the spiritual  connotations is 
Literally a Social  Rite of Excommunication  !
The absolute and potentially irrevocable declaration of Anathema for 
crimes against the net .
Simply put taking the precedent of denial known as UDP on Usenet to the 
Meatspace level .
Not only social ostrascim but employment denial too . And basically 
every peaceable and legal defensible method of
reward for potentially  unforgivable crimes .

Are we going to say " good work on crashing 300K users with that cute 
worm you wrote - here's a raise " ?

Every terrorist -and not being melodramatic but seriously reconsidering 
the stakes of malware it has become thinkable to label the writers of 
such malicious code thusly - they all thrive on media and FUD . Deny 
them both and they starve .
Circle our metaphorical wagons, beef up our security in sane real ways 
and upon tracing the authors of ANY obviously intentionally malicious 
code we declare them an UNPERSON .

  They speak and none shall hear . They walk in front of us and we see 
them not. None shall give them aid nor comfort. Neither shall any openly 
quibble at the rightness of the Bans . If guilt be so provably upon one 
that none dare contest it save by bearing false witness then so shall 
stand the Ban . Again - there is already case law precedent that" 
keyboard  crimes" have been held accountable for causing human deaths ! 
  So the above explains my more ethical suggestion for handling 
malicious coders . They are _Dead_ to us . No more 
LUG/GeekGroup/Tavern/Bowling alley/etc gatherings .
They will be welcomed nowhere . Their literal name shall be obliterated 
 None shall dare admit they even knew them .

No fame . No talk shows.   No T-shirts proclaiming the injustice of "why 
is this a crime ? "

Simple concept - Write Malware- intentionally cause damages with it and 
your "life" is OVER . Full Stop . Game Over.

OR is any among us present to declare that writing malicious code with 
evil intent aforethought is acceptable ?

Oren Beck