1996-06-27 - Re: CIA Fears UmpTeen InfoNukes

Header Data

From: Cerridwyn Llewyellyn <ceridwyn@wolfenet.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 05daa5a90649ca5bfd0c744d3e3629ffabe58ccb0a964938f0ca717c79391283
Message ID: <2.2.32.19960626213301.006951b4@gonzo.wolfenet.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-06-27 02:47:16 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 10:47:16 +0800

Raw message

From: Cerridwyn Llewyellyn <ceridwyn@wolfenet.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 10:47:16 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: CIA Fears UmpTeen InfoNukes
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960626213301.006951b4@gonzo.wolfenet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 08:32 AM 6/26/96 Mike McNally wrote:

>By the way, there was a thing in the Yahoo/Reuters feed about "attacks"
>on DoD computers; apparently British police arrested a "hacker" the
>other day.  Anyway, the article included a claim that there have been
>250,000 attempted break-ins on DoD computers over the past year.
>Does anybody know how they count that?

Nope, especially since they claimed a large percentage of those attacks
went "unnoticed".  I fail to see how they can know they happened if they
went unnoticed.  They also neglected to mention exactly what consitutes 
an "attack" or breakin attempt.  Some people far more cynical than the
average sheep would claim that report was used as a tool to justify new
massive expenditures to congress and the public.  //cerridwyn//






Thread