RE: [Full-Disclosure] Destroying PCs remotely?
From: Rick Thompson (rthompson_at_rrmm.net)
Date: 06/19/03
- Previous message: Jason Coombs: "[Full-Disclosure] Disclosure Debate FW: [ISN] When to Shed Light"
- Maybe in reply to: John.Airey_at_rnib.org.uk: "[Full-Disclosure] Destroying PCs remotely?"
- Next in thread: JT: "RE: [Full-Disclosure] Destroying PCs remotely?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
To: <full-disclosure@lists.netsys.com> Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 13:50:29 -0400
Recently, they very much wanted to make it NOT temporary as well, but cooler
heads prevailed. Unfortunately, history shows that they will reintroduce
the measure as many times as necessary to get it passed as part of some
unrelated legislation. We'll see how much you support it when they tag you
as a terrorist with no proof.
-----Original Message-----
From: full-disclosure-admin@lists.netsys.com
[mailto:full-disclosure-admin@lists.netsys.com]On Behalf Of Shawn
McMahon
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 1:14 PM
To: full-disclosure@lists.netsys.com
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Destroying PCs remotely?
<snip>
Well, as both of my sentences clearly state, the restriction of
liberties is temporary. The enhancment of security is permanent in that
if the terrorists are captured and/or killed, they no longer pose a
threat.
</snip>
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
- Previous message: Jason Coombs: "[Full-Disclosure] Disclosure Debate FW: [ISN] When to Shed Light"
- Maybe in reply to: John.Airey_at_rnib.org.uk: "[Full-Disclosure] Destroying PCs remotely?"
- Next in thread: JT: "RE: [Full-Disclosure] Destroying PCs remotely?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
