[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Intel v. Randal Schwartz: Why care?
unruh@physics.ubc.ca (William Unruh) writes:
>That is what they seem to think, however, Randall was an employee acting
>in what he felt was the best interests of the company. As such their
>action has exactly the opposite effect- namely ensuring that none of
>their employees gives a damn about the security of the system and
>opening them wide up to the external breakins ( which are a more serious
>threat in my opinion). An employee who wanted to break in would not run
>Crack on the internal machines themselves. He would make some attempt to
>hide his activity.
Nah, if any Intel system gets broken into (should I be talking future
or past tense?) Intel will just fire whoever was responsible. That is
obviously how the system works. Too bad there arent any Pentium
clones yet..but as soon as they pop up...
Btw, this is not a 1 time deal. I have a friend who worked at Intel
who got fired for 'showing too much initiative'. Geez...how lame can
they get.
Cor
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Cor Bosman | ____Xs4all Public Access____ | tel: +31-(0)20-622-2885 |
| cor@xs4all.net | Network Administrator | fax: +31-(0)20-622-2753 |
-------------The building is clear, Leisa has crossed the bridge-------SP6----
Follow-Ups:
References: