full-disclosure - Subject prefix changing! READ THIS! SURVEY!!

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: <ILEPILDHBOLAHHEIMALBIENHGJAA.jasonc@science.org>
From: jasonc at science.org (Jason Coombs)
Subject: Subject prefix changing! READ THIS! SURVEY!!

> 3. Do nothing

If it 'aint broke, don't fix it. My vote is #3.

The first time I heard about BugTraq it wasn't explained to me in terms of
infosec and my reaction was "that's the stupidest idea for a mailing list I've
ever heard, a bunch of people whining about software bugs in programs they
don't have any control over... what a waste of time."

Looking at the subject with an eye to who the competition and the audience
are, full-disclosure has a distinct advantage because its name is more
appropriate to the objective and more supportive to the fundamental interests
of security. Every e-mail distributed to the list and every message copied out
to other venues SHOULD carry the full-disclosure brand identifier in both the
subject and the footer as is now the case.

Don't change anything. Just consider the keyword branch it will create in
Google and you'll have to agree that "we don't want, and won't benefit from,
change." Hey, that should be the list's motto.

Jason

--

The subject header is going to change.

This is a survey to see whether people want:

1. To have no subject prefix, that is, we remove [Full-Disclosure]

or

2. To shorten the subject prefix from [Full-Disclosure] to [FD]

or

3. Do nothing