> fwiw, I'm not trying to be anonymous. I've updated my profile to make that plain. Were you thinking that I was arguing that e.g. you shouldn't be able to use

> fwiw, I'm not trying to be anonymous. I've updated my profile to make that plain. Were you thinking that I was arguing that e.g. you shouldn't be able to use a pseudonym to post comments? Sorry if that's how my comment reads. The thing I was wondering about was if/why we should allow spammers / crackers to retain their anonymity when attacking computers in the way you described. E.g., 100 attacks / second on some port, with no accountability for the persons who originated / propagated those packets. I'm curious about the pros/cons of law-enforcement agencies having the ability (and mandate) to hunt down the sources of such traffic. I realize that doing so would open a huge can of works, so I'm 10000% not advocating for it. I'd just like to understand the steel-man arguments for and against.