Let's collect this

Let's collect this

Let's collect the facts from the thread:

- SCO claims publicly that their website, "intranet", etc were disabled; focuses on "intranet" in subtitle(!) of press release - this is not an afterthought.

- A "syn attack" was seemingly never heard of. Their system (running Linux) should not be vulnerable to a "syn flood attack"

- It is not understandable how a defacement of the company web server should affect the company's intranet. Within five minutes, the attack from the internet should be stopped by pulling the plug.

- Furthermore, the SCO web site does not seem to be hosted by SCO. Unless they run their intranet externally also, there can be no connection.

- Their ftp and mail servers are up and running throughout the claimed attack

- Netcraft shows no problems until (well, allegedly) SCO themselves pulled the plug.

By all this evidence, at least the press release is inaccurate / not technically sound. Some of SCO's claims can be proven wrong.

However, an outage of the intranet, potentially over multiple days, makes it impossible to find out which code from Unix was lifted into Linux (assuming that the missing MIT mathematicians cannot be found, and the diff must be run again). Enough to sign an affidavit, and present to the judge on Jan 23?

If they do that, they're up for criminal charges, I hope.

I cannot resist, but excuse me for now:
Now, aren't we lucky that the attack did not originate from Debian, Gentoo, and Gnu project servers ... one might have thought that the copyright bandits had targeted valiant SCO again, no?