Adrian Lee

Somerset, uk

Sys Admin

So we shouldn't be naive and think that everyone will play nice, and therefore, when someone makes some malicious software that causes thousands/millions of pounds worth of damage, we shouldn't do much to them, because well, it would be naive to think that they would play nice?

How about people commiting fraud? They can often get jail sentances, you think we should be more 'morally ambivilent' to them as well?

We shouldn't NEED to have to make networks immune to malicious attacks, people just should attack them in that way. The fact that it's daft to think people won't attack them, doesn't mean we should let them off.
A lack of effort in making something secure isn't always the case either. In areas it is, and people who end up getting infected by a virus that's been around for 2 years only really have themselves to blame as there are plenty of protection solutions around. But thats not to say the virus writer shoudl get off scot free for all the damage they would've caused when it was intially released.

It's like saying it's people's own fault when they get ripped off by some cowboy plumber, just because they don't know enough about plumbing.

Yes, virus writers who cause considerable amounts of damage should be locked up, like any other criminal who maybe goes round smashing up cars and costing lots of money that way.