Re: Question for article

>Hello;  I read your postings in alt.wired with much interest.
>I am working on an article in the 'electronic frontier' vein, kind of like
>a cyber-gunslinger piece, and I'd love to have your input...

Great, just the sort of publicity we need; we're out here on the frontier,
alone with our reputations, and if you mess with us?  We shoot you.

>
>Say someone fucks you over (real or imagined) or flames you severely.  What
>sort of nasty things can you do to them or their data?  You know, like
>e-mail bombings etc.  I don't need particulars, since this is pointed at a
>mainstream audience.  (It also might not get published if the technophobic
>editor(s) think its too risque, if you know what I mean.)  I have some
>ideas already, but I'd like to hear from the pros. :->

Bad angle, man.  Some folks might get a kick out of screwing over someone
else, but doing it invites the authorities to step in and put the handcuffs
on all of us by restraining our access or tools (at least the legal ones). 
If it's only a flame and you're established - no problem, just ignore it or
defend yourself once or twice and let it go.  Besides, you're asking us to
tell you the questionably ethical stuff we could theoretically do if we
were motivated.  I don't think we would be, except in an extreme case, so I
would argue that the "rootin', tootin', quick-drawin' console cowboy" image
you're trying to perpetuate is way off the mark.

Also remember, the probable penalty for mail bombing or any data
destruction is being forced off your account which means that you need to
find alternative access or *be* *gone* *forever*.  Access isn't as hard to
come by as it used to be, but reputations are damn hard to live down. 
Magnetic media store bits reliably for about seven years, but our memories
last much longer.

--
Best regards,

Curtis D. Frye
cfrye@ciis.mitre.org
"If you think I speak for MITRE, I'll tell you how much they
 pay me and make you feel foolish."

There is an excellent essay in the December 21 issue of *The Village 
Voice* that talks about, among other things, the distinction between 
anonymity and pseudonymity in the NET (on MOOs in particular). There has 
been a small amount of calm discussion about pseudonymity on Cypherpunks, 
and I don't want to revive the embers; but the distinction the VV author 
(Julian Dibbell) makes between the abusive behavior often masked by 
anonymity and the more mature concern for one's pseudonymous reputation 
would make good background reading for anyone wanting to mull over this 
issue in print.