On Sat, 2010-04-17 at 13:14 -0700, Jim Preston wrote: > lists wrote: > > Lots of interesting views. Yes, people should have updated. However, > > this act of maliciously killing critical servers to score a point is the > > kind of thing malware writers do. It is also illegal in the UK under the > > computer misuse act. Insisting they update 'or else' is blackmail. Here > > we have two quite distinct criminal offences. > > > > Who is actually responsible for it, because free or not, your a fhucking > > criminal that want your hands cutting off and stuffing up your > > arhsehole. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net > > http://www.clamav.net/support/ml > > > First, anyones system that stopped sending mail, it was not a malicious > act just that their system can not handle the signature update that was > sent out. > Secondly, they all had both the chance to update before it happened OR > configure their systems to be RELIABLE in event of a software failure. > Having failed to either are throwing temper tantrums like a child. > Which still does not make it legal or ethical > And lastly, did not your parents tell you using such language is not polite? They told me to call a chunt a chunt. Personally I'd like to see the person responsible for this nasty, vindictive and childish act have his face broken open with a rusty claw hammer. But that's just an extreme point of view. Much like fhucking up a ton of systems like some power crazed botnet control is 'ok' is an extreme view.
Anything else I can help you with? > > Jim > _______________________________________________ > Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net > http://www.clamav.net/support/ml _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
