hah, true. So classic trolley problem - do you cause acceptable amount of damage to prevent more
-
-
Replying to @bensmith83
Exactly. I am wondering if the damage that is being done as we speak is sufficient to warrant experimenting with such options.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @berendjanwever @bensmith83
i.e. would option 1 cause less damage to the target than option 2.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @berendjanwever
option 1: large damage in small amount of cases, option 2: unknown damage in unknown but growing cases
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @bensmith83
The reports I'm seeing in main stream media on option 2 are of large damage in many cases, both rising fast.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @berendjanwever @bensmith83
And I didn't include other kinds of cyber crime, which only makes the case for option 1 stronger.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @berendjanwever
I don't disagree, I just don't know if anyone wants to take on that risk
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @b_jammin_ @bensmith83
AFAIK you'd be braking the law if you did this. Government would have to be involved if you ever wanted to implement this.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @berendjanwever
but what's the next step? Do you install RAT and keep them patched? Leave a doc about good security practices and backups?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Next step would be small scale experiments on volunteers to see what works and what does not.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.