governor huntsman and dennis blair issued a report last year that said maybe what we should be thinking about is giving license to hack back, at least in the form of diminishing the damage done. perhaps locking the data in the hacker's files taken from their company or shutting down their computers in some manner. this has been described as vigilantism. these are distinguished and vigils -- established individuals. is there some reason for that in your mind as one of the arrows in the arsenal for dealing with this big problem? >> with all things, it is dangerous to pick an extreme and say you can never defend yourself or have the ability to go all the way back to the adversary. either is an extreme option. there are analogs to this. if someone is shooting at you and your own home, you have the right to defend yourself. if someone is shooting at you from across the neighbor's yard, you also have the responsibility to be incredibly careful about how you should cross the neighbor's yard. youomeone is harassing you, need to leave that to the police and let them deal with that. the same thin

huntsman and dennis blair governor huntsman and dennis blair issued a report last year roughly the saidlook maybe why should we should be thinking about is giving business or those hacked license liberally to hang back at least in the form of diminishing the damage that has been done, perhaps locking the data into hackers files that has been taken from their company or shutting down the computers in some manner. this has been described as vigilanteism but these distinguished into bowls -- individuals john huntsman and dennis blair is that one of the arrows in our arsenal for dealing with this? >> it's dangerous to pick an extreme in that regard to say that you can never defend yourself what you say you have the authority all the way back to the adversary. either of those is an extreme option but their analogs to this. if someone is shooting at you and your own home you have the authority and of right and the responsibility of essentially defending yourself. actually shooting from across the neighbor's charity of the responsibility to be incredibly careful about how you shoot across the

but is there -- these are pretty distinguished individuals, dennis blair and jon huntsman. is there some reason to that in your mind as one of the arrows in our arsenal for dealing with this big problem? >> as in all things, i think it's dangerous to pick an extreme in that regard, to say that you can never defend yourself or to say that you kind of have the authority to go all the way back to the adversary. either of those is an extreme option. there are analogs to this. if somebody is shooting at you and you're kind of in your own home, you have the authority, the right, to responsibility to defend yourself, but if somebody is shooting at you from, say, across the neighbor's yard, you also have the responsibility to be incredibly careful about how you shoot across the neighbor's yard. and if somebody is merely harassing you, you need to kind of bring that up to the police and let them stand in and deal with that. the same thing plays here. my concern about that taken to the extreme is what you then say is this is all about the defense of private property and then people c