See your link here
The New Jersey Logic Bomb Case has some problems
3 comments- TAGS:Logic bomb, Medco Health Systems, system administrator, Yung-Hsun Lin
- IT TOPICS:Business Intelligence, Development, Security
Have you have heard about the story of Yung-Hsun Lin, a former system administrator for Medco Health Systems? He thought he was going to get laid off in a merger, so he planted a logic bomb that was set to go off on his birthday (April 23, 2004) and destroy a Medco drug database. The logic bomb was discovered, and now he has been "sentenced to 30 months in federal prison by U.S. District Judge Jose Linares, who also ordered the former systems administrator to pay $81,200 in restitution to Medco Health Systems."
Seems clear, right? Well, not exactly. First off, according to the story, Lin created the bomb in October 2003. But he was never laid off. So why didn't he remove the bomb? Did he simply disable it (the story says it failed to detonate) and not remove it? I am not clear on the timeline, but either way I would think he would try to remove the evidence.
Second, it was set to go off on April 23, 2004, Li's birthday. Ignoring the stupidity of that move, why wasn't it discovered until the following January if this statement from Medco spokeswoman Jen Luddy is true?
“Medco has systems and controls in place to monitor its data-related assets and ensure their security. Medco detected and neutralized the activity ensuring the integrity of our systems.”
Rrrriiiight....
Third, what in the world is wrong with the US attorney up there? Read this statement:
The results of this prosecution send a message to systems administrators and employees...
OK, what in the $@%# does that mean?? He should have said it sends a message to criminals with malicious intent. Inferring that system admins and employees better mind their P's and Q's because the government is watching you is just stupid!
The article also quoted Tom Bennett, vice president of marketing for Raytheon Oakley Systems, as saying:
“There's a concept of ‘who's watching the watcher,' where in this case you have a gentleman who has privileged access, but there should be someone [monitoring him].”
I understand that point very well. But the US attorney's statement is coming from someone simply trying to make a name for himself by acting tough and trying to scare big, scary system admins. What a nincompoop.
Print
Email this
Digg this
