[Wolves] I'm back!

wolves@mailman.lug.org.uk wolves at mailman.lug.org.uk
Sat Aug 9 14:01:01 2003

On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, [iso-8859-1] fizzy wrote:

> You seem to be giving the view of "that's the law,
> therefore it's right" whereas i would disagree with
> that.  I would support anyone who broke the RIP act,
> because i think it's a wrong law.  I would not be
> saying, "this is the law, therefore breaking it makes
> you a bad person".  The law can be an indication of
> the 'right path' however i don't think it is 100%
> correct all the time.

Correct. Nothing of man's hand is perfect. The law is no
exception. In fact, I'd say it's a pretty huge exception,
and getting worse and worse.

There seems to be a general belief by most people (chris
included) that the law and the government and large
companies are all going to magically do what's best for
them. This is not the case. What you don't know *can* hurt
you. This email will be cached for 7 years. Did you know

> I would say that the dude is lame, he was trying to
> get free phone calls, and he got caught.  He deserves
> to be laughed at.  Does he deserve us to give him a
> moral patronising talk about how what he did was wrong
> because it's illegal? Do you really think he cares
> that he stole 0.00001p worth of electricity from a
> multi billion pound corporation? I would imagine he
> could care less.

The theft of electricity is not the case here - neither is
the interruption/interception of calls (unless that's all
they did) most beige box attacks are to make "free" calls -
and this is fraud, plain and simple.

> I think the situation would be the same if he hacked a
> redhat 6.2 box and got caught.  Yes, he would be a
> lame script kiddie that needs laughing at, no, he
> wouldn't need talking to in a moral tone about the
> righteousness of private property.

Correct. (Although, he probably needs laughing at, then
tutoring about the technology)