full-disclosure - Security Industry Under Scrutiny: Part 3

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: John.Airey at rnib.org.uk (John.Airey@...b.org.uk)
Subject: Security Industry Under Scrutiny: Part 3

Dear Sockz.

You seem to have missed the diagram for your proposed solution. Without it
your post appears like just another rant, which surely it can't possibly be?

You make some sweeping statements, like a sys admin can only patch one
system. I myself patch more than one system on a regular basis. Your
statement is now null and void, since I've given a counter-example. Sorry
about that.

>From what I can gather you are proposing a block on the kinds of information
that can be made public, which is on the face of it an excellent idea.
However, we live in the real world (or at least most of us do), where we
have little control over what the citizens of other countries do. There is
nothing to stop anyone setting up any kind of underground network for
passing information and exploits from any country, unless you can create
some kind of International law to prevent this. However, this law would
override the constitutional powers of most countries so is unlikely to be
passed. That is to say, neither the EU or the USA would accept any
wide-ranging restrictions on the freedom of speech. Of course, another way
to prevent this would be to dismantle the Internet which is like cutting off
your nose to spite your face (as we say here).

I find it fascinating that you would consider a different security method
from that of anything else that we use in our modern world. Unless of course
you can convince me that there are other areas that you'd like to see
restricted. The recent case of the "Washington sniper" saw more journalists
involved in the case than police, and they came very close to wrecking the
investigation. In that case, should the journalists have been restricted in
their reporting, and if so, how?

Connecting anything to the Internet is a risky business. Like all things in
life, it has its benefits and pitfalls.

- 
John Airey, BSc (Jt Hons), CNA, RHCE
Internet systems support officer, ITCSD, Royal National Institute of the
Blind,
Bakewell Road, Peterborough PE2 6XU,
Tel.: +44 (0) 1733 375299 Fax: +44 (0) 1733 370848 John.Airey@...b.org.uk 

If you are easily offended, don't read the next line!
It always amazes me how people believe in evolution as if it is a fact when
at the very best it is and always will be a theory.

- 

NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is 
confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the 
intended recipient you are hereby notified that you must not use, 
disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on this email's content. If 
you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender 
immediately and then delete the email and any attachments from your 
system.

RNIB has made strenuous efforts to ensure that emails and any 
attachments generated by its staff are free from viruses. However, it 
cannot accept any responsibility for any viruses which are 
transmitted. We therefore recommend you scan all attachments.

Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email 
and any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily 
represent those of RNIB.

RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227

Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk