full-disclosure - Re: Administrivia: 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: <20030612232238.A4019@positron.mit.edu>
From: rsw at jfet.org (Riad S. Wahby)
Subject: Re: Administrivia: Poll

"Schmehl, Paul L" <pauls@...allas.edu> wrote:
> My suggestion to Len et al would be to allow unmoderated discussion of
> security vulnerabilities and security-related issues and to moderate
> everything else.

Unmoderated means unmoderated.  You can't have "unmoderated discussion"
on a moderated list, nor can you moderate on an unmoderated list.

Either this list will continue to fill the niche that bugtraq doesn't---a
security list that isn't moderated---or it won't.  If the admins decide to
moderate the list, they're turning full-disclosure into a bugtraq knockoff.
At that point, given the amount of noise, it's probably no longer worth
it to be subscribed to both, and full-disclosure will just lose.

Len et al, don't be foolish.  Keep full-disclosure useful and tell the
crybabies to man procmailrc.

-- 
Riad Wahby
rsw@...t.org
MIT VI-2 M.Eng