[Dshield] Port 135

John Hardin johnh at aproposretail.com
Fri Oct 18 23:45:47 GMT 2002


On Fri, 2002-10-18 at 15:16, J. Foobar wrote:

> You have no explicit intent to do harm,

I consider theft of time definite harm.

> no definable monetary loss,

How does traditional trespass law work? Someone walking across your
property does not do you direct harm, yet you have a legal right to
prevent that (not necessarily in all cases, granted).

> and a prosecution that relies on
> showing that the "attacker" must have known that port
> 135 was off limits because anyone that would leave
> such an "unusual service" open to the Internet would
> have to be "ignorant" or "clumsy."
>
> Your honor, we find for the defendent.

Probably accurate.

Would this be a parallel situation: A salesman walks into your home
throught the front door you accidentally left unlocked and starts making
a sales pitch - without your invitation - to you as you sit on your
living room couch. How would existing laws handle that?

I wonder if they (the spammers) have 135 firewalled off? If so, could
that be considered an indication that they know they are doing something
wrong?

-- 
John Hardin                                   <johnh at aproposretail.com>
Internal Systems Administrator                    voice: (425) 672-1304
Apropos Retail Management Systems, Inc.             fax: (425) 672-0192
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 ...people confuse "security" and "Trustworthy Computing."
                                 - Craig Mundie, MS Senior VP and CTO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 61 days until The Two Towers




More information about the list mailing list