[LINK] Internet crime stories
Fri, 23 Nov 2001 11:38:40 +1100 (EST)
I don't think ignoring ppl/orgs who leave themselves open to abues is the
correct way to go about things. They should be held responsible - either
criminal or civil negligence would be more effective, IMO.
As for insurance, I believe that some US companies are charging a premium
for those orgs running vulnerable M$ apps. I think it would be more
suitable for them to refuse insurance to such situations, but then
"business is business".
On Fri, 23 Nov 2001, Grant Bayley wrote:
> The moment that legislators wake up to this fact, there'll be a seachange
> in the way we deal with those people and organisations that leave
> themselves open to abuse - we'll simply ignore them.
> The insurance industry has always been aware of this, offering discounts
> on premiums to those who secure their homes and implement other protective
> measures. A shame this sort of thinking couldn't have prevailed in the
> area of "cybercrime".
LANNet Computing Associates - Your Linux people
Contact detail at http://www.lannetlinux.com
"We are either doing something, or we are not.
'Talking about' is a subset of 'not'."