full-disclosure - Morning Wood Poll

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: <200306121309853.SM01460@gx2604ycqz11>
From: dme at duda.com (Daniel M. Edwards)
Subject: Morning Wood Poll

The morning wood posts themselves are not what annoy me.  It is the barrage
of posts that follow that do.  Both sides of this argument are guilty.  The
anti-wood party posts how Morning Wood is a moron after he posts then the
pro-wood party responses by calling that person a moron.  It just keeps
going until I have 40 e-mails that can be summed by "Am Not" and "Are Too".

I like the idea for two full-disclosure lists one for disclosures and one
for discussions.

Daniel M. Edwards
Network Specialist
A. Duda & Sons, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com
[mailto:full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com] On Behalf Of David Sentelle
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 11:27 AM
To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com

I've already cast my vote, but I think a simple yes/no is not sufficient for
the real solution.

The real solution is to have a fully open full-disclosure mailing list, only
for full-disclosure.  People not disclosing vulnerabilities or bugs would be
warned then banned on repeat offenses.  

To resolve the issue of ongoing correspondence regarding disclosures made on
the full-disclosure list, there would be a full-disclosure-DISCUSSION list.
That would be the 'noise' list, that would contain 99% of what is currently
in full-disclosure.

This post should go to the discussion list.  Many of Morning Wood's posts
would hopefully go to the discussion list, with the disclosures he's made
going to the full-disclosure list.

Would the addition of a discussion list, and the policy change for the
full-disclosure list, really cramp anyone's freedom of speech or the value
of the full-disclosure list?

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and 
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they
are addressed.  If you have received this e-mail in error, you are 
prohibited from using, divulging any of its contents, or forwarding 
this email.  Please notify admin@...cbank.com and delete it from 
your system.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html