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>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 20 Sep 2007 12:33:50 +0530 (IST)
From:	Satyam Sharma <satyam@...radead.org>
To:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
cc:	Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com>,
	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: NFS4 authentification / fsuid



On Wed, 19 Sep 2007, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> 
> Uh, is there somebody else that feels they're being enlightened by this
> discussion?

Ok, probably I got a bit too harsh with Kyle there. But what I don't
understand is why is it so hard for someone to accept they're wrong
on this list, thank the other person and just move on ?!

Even when you've explained an attack that wasn't considered, you've
explained why the assumptions of the scheme were wrong, you've mentioned
previous precedents, and *technically* refuted the other person's claims.
Still, people feel obliged to *stick* to their (wrong) positions, subtly
"shift" their argument (using new adjectives or qualifiers), whatever,
just as long as they don't have to accept they were, simply, wrong.

That just sucks.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ