On 07/12/04 21:59 -0500, Adam Shostack wrote:
<quoting style corrected>
> On Mon, Dec 06, 2004 at 09:45:24AM -0500, Dave Piscitello wrote:
> | I think the "reason" no one's doing too much evil of the sort you
> | describe with spyware is that the motivation of spyware companies is
> | "for profit". Many of the spyware developers are full time
> | programmers with 401K and medical bennies working for profit-seeking
> | companies that have deplorable business ethics. Phishing crosses the
> | vague line between what is illegal and what is unpleasant/intrusive.
> |
> | On 2 Dec 2004 at 14:43, J. Oquendo wrote:
> |
> |
> | > how long until someone wisens(evils) up and creates a
> | > replica in conjuction with hosts files and scams a couple of thousand
> | > people into sending priceless information to some shmuck with too much
> | > time on his/her hands.
> |
>
> Dave,
>
> I suspect I misunderstand you.
>
> Are you saying that the practice of phishing is in a grey
> area? I mean, I'm on the side of Abagnale and the redemptionists (to
I understood that to mean that while adware/spyware is unpleasant and
intrusive, but possibly not illegal, phishing is clearly illegal.
> reprise a debate), but I have no doubt that phishing is nasty
> misrepresentation and fraud, and not justifiable by any logic. And I
> say that even as I can appriciate the artistry of a well executed
> phish, in the same way I can appriciate a Jet Li movie. I wouldn't
> want to hit it in real life.
Artistic or not, it ranks out there as a crime.
/me returns to looking for patterns in phishing accounts while
terminating them.
Devdas Bhagat
_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards_at_honor.icsalabs.com
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
Received on Dec 12 2004
Intro
