-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - -- Per Heldal <heldal@eml.cc> wrote:

Regulation targeting software-vendors and service-providers has little effect as it is an attempt to disrupt the money-flow somewhere in the middle. It's usually more efficient to "attack" the source. I.e. authorities must hold computer users responsible and make them pay every penny (or millions;) it costs to investigate and clean up their mess. Mainstream OS'es as we know them would have been unsellable in today's market if users, ever since the internet was commercialised, had been held responsible.

When the banks & merchants get sick & tired of underwriting the fraud investigation and coverage liabilities, I think we will begin to see more of an effort to put more of the liability in the user's lap. In fact, I think we are already starting to see some movement in the fringes regarding this. The only thing I can say about this is: be careful what you ask for. The issues that might result as fall-out might be uglier than what we have now. :-/ - - ferg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.6.1 (Build 1012) wj8DBQFGcxuCq1pz9mNUZTMRAqmVAJwPwjgyLxKzlNqwbRZgXUk2uD4aywCdH+CQ MQJd8B/HGuhDFhCSN4K0K0M= =3NdK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(at)netzero.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/