I mostly agree with you, but I can't agree on the point that DDoS attacks shouldn't be illegal in and of themselves. In my eyes, they fall under the same general area as vandalism - if someone breaks stuff, they should be held accountable for breaking it.
Another way of looking at it is that if you're standing outside a store or someone's home and prevent people from entering, the owner of the store or home has a legitimate beef with you. Similarly, if you prevent people from accessing someone's website, they should have a legitimate case against you, even if no actual economic damage is done. Or do you think the Church of Scientology should be free to DDoS xenu.net?
I mostly agree with you, but I can't agree on the point that DDoS attacks shouldn't be illegal in and of themselves. In my eyes, they fall under the same general area as vandalism - if someone breaks stuff, they should be held accountable for breaking it.
Another way of looking at it is that if you're standing outside a store or someone's home and prevent people from entering, the owner of the store or home has a legitimate beef with you. Similarly, if you prevent people from accessing someone's website, they should have a legitimate case against you, even if no actual economic damage is done. Or do you think the Church of Scientology should be free to DDoS xenu.net?