David Heath
Sunday, 15 November 2009 11:30
The poll asked, succinctly enough: "What do you think about the iPhone worm's author?"
The (completely unscientific) results, based on 721 votes, were intriguing:
He's done iPhone users a favour. This was an acceptable way to raise awareness of poor security. 547 votes.
He's acted recklessly by releasing the worm, the ends didn't justify the means. 69 votes.
I hope he's investigated by the cops - when he released that worm he broke the law. 105 votes.
What this is saying is that around 75% of visitors to a well-known anti-virus site (people who ought to know better) are essentially supporting Towns' actions.
Graham Cluley, writing in his blog comments, "Has the world gone completely bonkers? It's a depressing notion that most people think that doing harm and breaking computer crime laws is a good thing. The 21-year-old Australian student who wrote the iPhone worm has acted utterly irresponsibly - even if he now regretted (which he doesn't) releasing a worm into the wild, there is nothing he can do to stop it continuing to try and infect jailbroken iPhones.
"Can you imagine a world in which everyone takes it upon themselves to release worms and viruses into the wild in the hope that it might raise awareness'?"
Most white-hats take this view, and rightly so. For instance, many years ago, Paul Ducklin, also of Sophos, took apart the "good virus" argument very succinctly.
Think again. Most businesses only have PART of a DR plan - and this spells business disaster in the event of an IT disaster.
Download The Seven Sins of Disaster Recovery White Paper now and find out how you can prevent this happening to you.