There's an interesting post over at The Quiet Earth , with some more comment at Financial Cryptography talking about a controversy that's blown up around Frank Abagnale speaking at the CSI conference.
My feeling about this is that while I can see the point made on the CISSP list about not glamourising criminal behaviour, Mr Abagnale's crimes were a long time ago and as he was convicted and "did the time" for them, as such he should be able to move on without them causing a hinderance to him.
Also I think that the point about glamourising criminal behaviour would depend very much on the content of Mr Abagnale's speech. If he gets up and explains what a mistake trying to commit frauds is and speaks about the help he gave the FBI, in what way is that glamourising crime?
I can't really agree with people who take the position of never speaking with a "convicted felon", as it leads into a bit of a moral quagmire. Would this position mean if someone has a conviction for speeding they should be ineligable to speak at security conferences?
Posted by rorym at January 4, 2005 8:17 AM | TrackBack