North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Hi

  • From: ¨°şİ[Queen Vamp]İş°¨
  • Date: Wed Dec 12 00:52:37 2001

> Guilty for clue-impairment is a lot different than guilty of intent to
> spread.  As for clue-impairment, I think everyone here agrees that Cisco
> should have this well filtered.  If this was your intended statement, then
> yes, agreed.  It was the implication of malice that I think was
> inappropriate, especially in a public forum.

Well hang on a bit there.... shouldn't merit have this filtered as well?
Agreed the person who opened the said SCR should have had a clue, but what
about merit protecting its subscribers?  At very least one would think they
would be geared up to thwart the spread of such viruses.

X-Virus-Scanned: by MailScan