dennisg@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Dennis E. Griesser) (08/30/85)
In article <160@chinet.UUCP> rlk@chinet.UUCP (Richard L. Klappal) writes: >Backup or no backup, anyone who intentially posts anything that >intentionally destroys information, and misrepresents it as >something worthwhile deserves the greatest prosecution the law >allows, and the parents should be responsible for the actions >of their malicious (sp?) little brats if they try to hide >under "juvenile". Maybe make them pay for re-entering and Indeed! Actually, my first reaction was that a destructive trojan horse program is an act of vandalism. On deeper consideration, it is much worse. Perhaps it is the digital equivalent of a letter-bomb. Reasoning: o it can be devastating in destructive potential to the unfortunate user o it can go off when you least expect it o an innocent person (like the mailman) probably handed it to you o the perpetrator can cover his tracks very well There are a couple of major differences: o it can proliferate, injuring more than just the intended victim o these guys probably had no single victim in mind Restitution is one thing, but this crime needs more than just that. Sadly, the perpetrators will probably never be found, so there is little use in brewing up suitable punishment.