[LINK] Internet crime stories

[Howard Lowndes]

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".

-- 
Howard.
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'."