Tuesday, July 29, 2008

Kamala Harris: The new village i*iot?

[Please click on title to read original article]

Okay, hate Childs as much as you want. And yes, also worry about the fact that he broke federal laws. No one is disagreeing with any of all this.

I also agree that he did not plan his "endgame" well and looks quite the idiot.

But his whole complaint was that the city was unable to protect itself, or act mature. He lamented that his superiors were ill-equipped to understand the sensitivity of network security. Thus he refused to give them the password.

Was he right?

Yes he was!

Let's take a look. Why wasn't this handled better? What is San Francisco winning out of this?

Setting an example?

An example for what?

Childs himself never put the network in jeopardy.

However, the moment you hand over the passwords to the DA's office, look what they did?

They printed them on a list and sent it into public records!

To prove that Childs might have been able to login as a legitimate user and wreak havoc.

Irony, thy name is "District Attorney, City of San Francisco".

I mean, come on. Childs is going to go to prison - for being more intelligent than the collective Government of the City of San Francisco which prints out passwords for the world to see and harbors felons paying for them with city taxes.

God. If I had known what the bottom level of IQ to work for the City of San Francisco was going to be, I would have applied there....

I am almost certain, I would make a better District Attorney, or Network Security Supervisor.


Talk about people (read the sex neutrality carefully!) giving away passwords for a toffee bar:


Also remember, this is the same city which claimed a guy managed to stab himself as a fun way to commit suicide. Later, he also managed to wipe out the knife so that people could use the knife for other purposes after he was gone, without feeling icky! :


Claimer: Views presented in this article probably or definitely allude to people real, unreal, imaginary, virtual and otherwise. Any harm or libel cast on people dead, alive or transient is either intentional or otherwise. The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author, however he refuses to take responsibility for said views and believes the use of "airquotes" to be a birthright. Claims not included in this claim are also claimed.

No comments: