I think everyone has some good points here. Maybe even the NIPC. :-)
Namely:
1. The NIPC can use the stats data on incident calls to do budget
'justification'.
2. They have to gear their statements to the general populus, so advising
people
to call them rather than potentially aggravating or antagonizing said
intruder is
a 'safe statement' for people without incident control expertise (somewhat
analagous
to 'caution - hot drink')
3. The element of surprise in a serious situation can mean the difference
between an
arrest with evidence or an arrest of someone with a drive that somehow
managed to
become low level formatted, baked at 450, and stored safely in joe's cabinet
where he keeps his magnet collection.
Matt
----- Original Message -----
From: Gregory Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 9:40 AM
Subject: Re: NIPC and the community at large...
>
> > Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 11:21:21 -0400 (EDT)
> > From: "Paul D. Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > I've just had a gander at a small 3-page fold-out brochure from the
> > U.S. National Infrastructure Proctection Center (No publication number),
> > and under "What To Do When You Have Been Victimized", the final bullet
> > item is "DO NOT contact the suspected perpetrator."
> >
> > I'm wondering if this is the start of an end-run around the usual
> > community practice of contacting technical contacts during incidents? I
> > know there's probably a lot of "Cybercrime" funding at stake here, and
I'm
> > sure that contacting a single attacker is sometimes a bad idea, but
given
> > that this is a terse little handout, I worry about the implications of
> > emphatic statements without serious qualification.
>
> Well... If everyone contacts the NIPC whenever an 'incident' occurs,
> they (the NIPC people) will be able to go to Congress and say "... See
> how much cybercrime there is? After we started, there was an X%
> increase. We have been able to 'contain' x%, arrest y%, and, by our
> efforts, are making the internet more secure for "Motherhood and Apple
> Pie". Thus we need more money, poeple, resources, et al. ..."
>
> Please pardon my cynicism, but ...
>
> Regards,
> Gregory Hicks
> -
> [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
