full-disclosure - RE: [ISN] DARPA pulls OpenBSD funding

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]

Message-ID: <200304201934.h3KJYRKI009524@caligula.anu.edu.au>
From: avalon at caligula.anu.edu.au (Darren Reed)
Subject: RE: [ISN] DARPA pulls OpenBSD funding

In some mail from yossarian, sie said:
> 
> > > Is "them" including corporate interests if they conflict with personal
> > > freedom? Probably, since the companies = the shareholders = people.....
> > > Are you including DMCA / Patriot Act / etc.?
> >
> > What have they got to do with this ?  Nothing so far as I can see.
> 
> A lot. Under patriot act, bookstores can be asked to inform authorities who
> buys what books. This can and does include books we in the security industry
> consider must have reads. It might include a new book on hardening IIS,
> considered 'unfair' and 'not wise' by MS - whatever the reasons. Under this
> legislation, knowledge can be considered a WMD, and the population must be
> datamined. If you break in to the connection your fritz chip opens to see
> what info it sends on your computer use - i.e. want to know how far your
> privacy is invaded - you break DMCA. If your behavioural patterns match a
> predefined risky lifestyle ... enter demonisation.

You seem somewhat predisposed to want to discuss topics other than freedom
of speach.  I'll let you rant - I'm not going to bite as this is not what
this thread is about and I can't say I'm all that interested in it either.

...

You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding about where the line is
in doing damage to others.  My advice to you is to do some research on
defamation and libel cases to learn about what it is considered "bad
form" to expect free speech to protect.  To whit, the cases you cited
do not, IMHO, fall into those that you might consider to be misconduct
and where "freedom of speech" is not accepted as a defence.

Darren