> Yes, *there are* benign uses of FSP. Just remember that.
Hmm. I suspect this is going to end up just like the pay-phones argument in
the U.S.:
1) Many payphones in downtown areas in U.S. cities are being removed or
severely disabled, because their main use was by drug-trafficers. This
often removes the only telephones accessible by people in those
neighbourhoods who can't afford their own phones.
2) Many payphones (esp. in airports) are no longer able to make calling-card
calls to many foreign nations, because most of the calls to those places
were being made using stolen cards. This also impacts people who are
legitimately calling those countries using credit cards.
The question is, is it 'right' to disable a useful tool just because most of
that tools common usage is anti-social? Should we ban FSP just because it's
most commonly a cracker's tool?
(Y'all know already that my answer is a firm "Yes!"...)
--
C. Harald Koch, Network Manager | "Cable is not a luxury, since many areas have
Alias Research Inc. Toronto, ON | poor TV reception". - Mayor, Tucson AZ, 1989
chk @
alias .
com | [ apparently, good TV reception is a basic
chk @
gpu .
utcc .
utoronto .
ca | necessity -- at least in Tucson -kl ]
References:
|
|
