good point. some recent european (or are these only french?) laws allow prosecuting based on attempts. but this seems theoritical, as I don't see how to prove the "attempt" since logs can be forged. on the other hand, if the attacker does not cause damages, you can only prosecute him for having tried (he finally only accessed a service where you redirected him), and if the redirection is well done, he won't cause damage. Am I missing something? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote > Your point is well taken, unfortunately, to prosecute someone you >really need them to actually access a system that they are not authorized to. >Attempting to access a system isn't sufficient for prosecution. - [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
- FW: Redirecting closed port connections Eddy Kalem
- Re: FW: Redirecting closed port connections parks
- Re: FW: Redirecting closed port connections parks
- RE: FW: Redirecting closed port connections William . Stackpole
- RE: FW: Redirecting closed port connections mouss
- RE: FW: Redirecting closed port connections Paul D. Robertson
- RE: FW: Redirecting closed port connections William . Stackpole
- RE: FW: Redirecting closed port connections mouss
- RE: FW: Redirecting closed port connections Paul D. Robertson
- RE: FW: Redirecting closed port connections Ben Nagy
- RE: FW: Redirecting closed port connections William . Stackpole
- RE: FW: Redirecting closed port connections Damian Gerow
- RE: FW: Redirecting closed port connections mouss
- SOS: VPN Thru Linux RedHat 6.1 as gateway Rajesh Divakaran
- Re: FW: Redirecting closed port connections Steve Coleman
- Re: FW: Redirecting closed port connectio... Paul D. Robertson
- RE: FW: Redirecting closed port connections Damian Gerow
