Very, very interesting article. I also find it interesting that you seem to blame the government because their web-site was hacked, even though the article (which you quoted without attribution or link) also mentioned a University web-site and a private corporation's web-site that were compromised in the same way, and further went on to say that other sites could also be at risk if they had anonymous FTP access enabled. Additionally, I don't think that the timeframe of "July 9 to mid-morning yesterday" (when was yesterday, for the article?) is that long of a time period considering the frequency of security checks. Their response time to removing the data also seemed appropriate to me.

Very, very interesting article. I also find it interesting that you seem to blame the government because their web-site was hacked, even though the article (which you quoted without attribution or link) also mentioned a University web-site and a private corporation's web-site that were compromised in the same way, and further went on to say that other sites could also be at risk if they had anonymous FTP access enabled. Additionally, I don't think that the timeframe of "July 9 to mid-morning yesterday" (when was yesterday, for the article?) is that long of a time period considering the frequency of security checks. Their response time to removing the data also seemed appropriate to me

Pseudo my man, I am not blaming anyone. Again I overestimated the open mindedness of the JU readers. This Article was from www.worldnetdaily.com (a simple web search would have told anyone this). The author of this article did not seem to me to be to critical. I don't see anywhere in the article blame being laid on anyone. But I guess if your looking to blame someone you acn read it that way if you wish. Personally I think its kind of hunorous that they keep using Government web sites. The Governments internet security policy is not the greatest, as is widely known in the Internet/ Computer Crime circle. But I do not blame the Government agency cited in the article, as there are many things you can not control or see into the future. Your assertation that I blame someone is a little over the top. Also just for the readers, anonymous FTP's are fairly easy targets for those that want to use them for illegal uses. I will edit the article to make sure anyone can find the orginal...

same tactic and technique as crackers who use not-too-secure ftp space to store and distribute warez right?  if it wasnt university or gov site space, theyd find commercial ftp space.   if the file name isn't changed frequently, should be able to run search using an ftp engine and find other locations.  (actually i just ran one using the first ftp search engine i turned up and found 42 .../007 directories)

(actually i just ran one using the first ftp search engine i turned up and found 42 .../007 directories)

Very intersting kingbee.. thanks for the info..

Pseudo my man, I am not blaming anyone. Again I overestimated the open mindedness of the JU readers. This Article was from www.worldnetdaily.com (a simple web search would have told anyone this). The author of this article did not seem to me to be to critical. I don't see anywhere in the article blame being laid on anyone. But I guess if your looking to blame someone you acn read it that way if you wish.

Perhaps I had read too much into what you had posted. Let's see... you posted an article, without comment. Silly me to think that the article seemed to speak for you. I'm certain that by reading your insightful cut-and-pastings, I can become open-minded as much as someone who can see right through my facade and be able to tell that I'm looking to blame someone. Allow me to slink off and hang my head in shame.

FWIW, I read "The state of Arkansas unknowingly helped the al-Qaida terrorist network" as being at least mildly blaming of the government agency in question. I thought perhaps that "maybe they should be more careful" was in the same vein as well.

Finally, I wasn't so much concerned with reading the article as originally posted on some other web-site (I hadn't accused you of editing it or anything like that), but that you had quoted an entire article without giving credit to either the original author or the site from which you had acquired it.