> But the article also says less than 2% of the "attacks" resulted > in a successful intrusion. > http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/17/technology/17HACK.html
2% would be an embarrassingly large success rate for intrusion on a "secured" military network. But, I'm sure they'll float any articles they can to get congress to allocate more funds to the cyberpanic squad--go go big brother. Not too mention, the news whores are always a willing accomplice in fabricating hype. Oh wait, is today cynical Friday? --jnull