Message-ID: <3F7B2A87.90207@science.org>
From: jasonc at science.org (Jason Coombs)
Subject: Re: [ISN] Technology Firm With Ties to Microsoft
 Fires Executive Over Criticism

Paul Robichaux wrote:
> I erred ...
> but I think Roberta Bragg said ...
> http://mcpmag.com/security

It was very good of you to acknowledge, Paul, that your response was in 
error. Mistakes happen... I personally make several per day. Often in 
writing. One's goal, if one cares about security, must be to understand 
the source of behaviors, biases, preconceived notions, 
misunderstandings, etc. that one exhibits in connection with mistakes, 
even if a given symptom has only been observed once, and trace those 
flaws to their root cause -- then reprogram.

Roberta Bragg makes a sincere attempt to respond to the report, but she 
does so with emotion rather than critical thinking and an open mind. 
Roberta is currently unwilling to accept, emotionally, that she is 
personally supporting a malicious entity that is still engaged in unfair 
and unreasonable attacks against good people. This is a normal response 
that people go through (denial) when they are struggling to come to 
terms with having enabled (co-dependency) a substance abuser. The 
thinking is something like this:

"Microsoft can't be evil because if they are then what does that make me?"

To add context, my professional background includes almost being 
published by Microsoft Press recently in the security area... Until 
Microsoft saw that the security advice being offered by my book told too 
much of the truth, and much of it just wasn't compatible with corporate 
monopolistic self-interest.

Here is my response to her article. Since you appear to be an ally of 
hers, perhaps you'll forward my comments to her personally.

10/1/2003:  Jason Coombs  says:

Roberta has been so badly compromised by her own bias that she isn't 
aware that she completely missed the point of the report. The Microsoft 
monopoly is causing severe harm, and its potential for new specific harm 
increases (force multiplication) as the monopoly grows.

A necessary step in the process of information security is selecting 
software that is designed with open, provable security features -- until 
Microsoft changes its abusive, monopolistic behaviors (which come from 
the top of the company) it will never build a trustworthy product.

Roberta chooses to trust Microsoft because she is underinformed. Perhaps 
she has smelled the truth and opted for a financially-comfortable 
condition of denial where she can help further Microsoft's cause while 
looking the other way when Microsoft commits terrible offenses. This way 
the stink doesn't create a denial of service condition for her personal 
bank account balance.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists