jdow wrote: > From: "Mikkel L. Ellertson" <mikkel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> A better idea - hold the company that produced the defective >> software that allows this to happen. After all, they spent how much >> convincing people that all you need to do is "point and click" to >> administer a Windows box... (OK - with what they can spend on >> lawyers and their political clout, you couldn't win in the U.S.) > > Oh really? Linux boxes get hacked, too. Who gets sued? > Well, if a Linux distribution ignored standard standard security practices the way MS has, the distributor should get sued. If you have someone running a system with a version of the software that has known and patched bugs, the person running the system. In ether case, the person that cracked the system should get sued as well. Think of it this way, if a doctor loses a patient because he did sloppy work, you sure the doctor. If an engineer designs a bridge wrong, and it collapses, he gets sued. (Or worse.) But if the contractor used substandard material and that caused the bridge to collapse, you sue the contractor. If a plane crashes into the bridge, you have an interesting time assigning the blame. If you overdose or die from the medicine you took because of bad quality control, as opposed to you not following the prescribed dosage, who is at fault? Mikkel -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!
