On 11/09/2014 02:38 AM, jdd wrote:
most thief looks about the computer, not it's content
What do you mean by that? Are you saying that computers are stolen for the hardware value alone? While the re-sale value of a high-end gaming laptop might make that worth while, the kind of pathetic things that my banking, telecom and I would guess James' pharma clients supply to their minions are not so powerful. All the ones I saw were low end IBM or Leveno units, bulk purchases on a 3 year CCA cycle. But there is a clear market for information. Even the 'generic' information of credit card numbers and PII. A moment's consideration and you'll realise that a laptop owned by a telcom field agent is going to have client information from sales or maintenance visits and possibly billing information as well. That of a pharma company cold be involved in field trials. That of bank, client or similar information. I can personally attest to 2 of the above 3. One engineering firm I was at had poor physical security and a thief came one night and stole hard drives from the servers - faster than copying! But easier than sealing the while computer. Perhaps the view that the computer was more valuable than its contents held in the last century and holds in the minds of many judges in the legal system who have an antiquated view of "physical evidence', but these days even the police and other law enforcement have caught on to the idea that it is the contents that count. -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org