Reply From: <anon>
On Mon, 2 Nov 1998, John Vranesevich wrote:
> reading the article, I found it to be disappointingly superficial. They
> did these hacks "because they were bored and couldn't agree on a video
> to watch." Whatever... I was hoping that this interview would delve
> into the minds of the HFG a bit deeper.
Judging from the apparent savvy of HFG, I would imagine they chose to
remain intentionally vague in order to avoid the potential of any FBI
profiling. (Although it should be noted that HFG gave away a lot of
information in their HTML comments of the various mirrored hacks I've
seen.)
> It's obvious that these guys aren't your stereotypical "crackers" as
> this report seems to suggest. I think their motives are far more
> complex than that. I would be curious to find out what the HFG's
> reaction to this article was, and if they were given the opportunity to
> review it before it went to print?
I would personally be shocked if HFG did another "up periscope." That
they even talked to the media seems curiously out-of-step with their
apparent way of doing things. (Of course, I should note that I was
shocked that HFG hit the New York Times since I figured they would vanish
after they hit JPL/NASA.)
> Also, I found it somewhat scarry that Adam mentioned the "3 room condo".
> Talk about helping the FBI narrow down their suspect list a bit, huh?
Um...doesn't Carolyn Meinel live in a three room condo?
-o-
Subscribe: mail majordomo@repsec.com with "subscribe isn".
Today's ISN Sponsor: Repent Security Incorporated [www.repsec.com]
Received on Tue Nov 3 11:43:37 1998