Australian firm again asks SCO to show proof of IP violations (SMH) [LWN.net]

Well... by myself, not much of an impact

Posted Feb 3, 2004 10:10 UTC (Tue) by leonbrooks (guest, #1494) [Link]

Kieran is just a lackey, but he's probably not silly enough to react before he's forced to. The SCO Group are trying to play the underdog role for all the sympathy they can get, which of course goes out the door if he attacks CyberKnights. Also, each time he reacts he makes an opportunity for some court to say, "OK, so where's the ~~cheese~~evidence?"

If I was actually delivering the message "to them", I'd rather be printing it out on a suitable piece of wandoo so I could splinter it up thoroughly before properly delivering it to the men who would blackmail millions (and are in the process of blackmailing thousands of those poor suckers already contractually obligated to his company as we speak, did you read your EULA carefully?) on a brash, expensive bluff and apparently just for their own gain.

I imagine that in at least some cases I might have to hurry to get in ahead of enraged crowds of Latter Day Saints once they realise just what these particular "saints" have been doing to the Church's reputation by way of exemplifying their codes of behaviour.

I'd like to have a few more pieces of wandoo prepared for proper ceremonial delivery to the silhouettes behind him too. I think they've worked hard for it, and should get what they deserve, in a lasting fashion. It would be very... instructive for anyone else considering putting a stick through countless corporate spokes by playing dog-in-the-manger with secondhand ideas they don't have title to and didn't invent anyway.

However, when all of the skeletons finally exit the corporate closets, a FSWE might be the least of their worries, too. No matter how rich you are, you can't be a lamprey on the public good forever. Consequences come to everybody.

D'ohl and his goons don't have to split the FBI's sides by hiring bodyguards, though. While the Head Barrator and his minions have more than earned their FSWEs, I won't be the one delivering them.

My purpose is not justice: that would be asking too much in this culture, it is simply to stop D'ohl from dragging my profession's name through the mud. And I will do whatever it takes, within the law and honour, to bring that about.

Sorry...

Posted Feb 3, 2004 10:11 UTC (Tue) by leonbrooks (guest, #1494) [Link]

...forgot the <soapbox> ... </soapbox> container.

Australian firm again asks SCO to show proof of IP violations (SMH)

Posted Feb 3, 2004 0:04 UTC (Tue) by wildpossum (guest, #17744) [Link]

It would be good if someone well-known to the press (Bruce Perens are you reading this?) would point out that the primary purpose of MyDoom is to install a spam relay backdoor and a keylogger, and that the SCO DDoS (if it exists, some people claim it just does a DNS lookup of www.sco.com and nothing more, surely someone must have dissected the virus and can say for sure?) is just a distraction to frame Linux.

I see syndicated reports talk about SCO vs Linux in connection with MyDoom and some of them even get their facts wrong like saying that SCO owns Unix. I pointed BBC news to groklaw.net for clarification. We have to do a better job of making sure the press gets the facts.

MyDoom dissections

Posted Feb 3, 2004 1:43 UTC (Tue) by csamuel (subscriber, #2624) [Link]

There is a very good digest of messages from the trojan horse list at: http://www.math.org.il/newworm-digest1.txt that includes a number of attempts at dissection. My reading is that there is certainly a DDOS thread in the program (simple HTTP GET's), but a question about whether or not it actually works.

Bruce Perens are you reading this?

Posted Feb 3, 2004 5:11 UTC (Tue) by Tashlan (guest, #17277) [Link]

Apparently, he is reading it precognitively!