full-disclosure - <Cisco Message> Mike Lynn's controversial Cisco Security Presentation

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: <20050729214053.O75285@ubzr.zsa.bet>
Date: Sat Jul 30 03:46:40 2005
From: measl at mfn.org (J.A. Terranson)
Subject: <Cisco Message> Mike Lynn's controversial
	Cisco Security Presentation

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005, Jason Coombs wrote:

> J.A. Terranson wrote:
> > didn't get my copy from Infowarrior.  Nor have I seen any "order".
>
> "On Thursday, Judge Jeffrey White of the United States District Court
> for the Northern District of California issued a permanent injunction
> preventing further distribution of the material (attached). Cisco
> Systems, Inc. and Internet Security Systems, Inc. v. Michael Lynn and
> Black Hat Inc. United States District Court, Northern District of
> California."
>
> http://www.infowarrior.org/users/rforno/lynn-cisco.pdf
>
> Your point seems to be that because your name was not listed in the list
> of Defendants, nor were you referenced in a Does 1-99 placeholder, that
> the order does not apply to you.

For the sake of argument I'm going to assume that link points to the order
that finally showed up?  Pleae note that prior to it's arrival at
infowarrior, the order was of no force nor effect - as I am sure you will
agree.  Assuming they have now seen and thereby become bound by the order,
I am certain they will comply and honor it.  However, I have neither a
copy of any order, nor personal knowledge of any terms of any order, and
am currently not bound to destroy any copy(s) I may have made.

The law also recognizes that unenforceable orders are void on their face,
and if that link is in fact an order to every person who has ever seen the
document to forget and destroy - the order is impossible on it's face due
to the sheer numbers of people involved.

I do not much follow this crap anymore, as I am sure you noticed due to my
almost non-existent posting here in the last year or so (work doesn't
leave much time for play) - yet even I was sent copies by multiple people
prior to hearing about it here.

The barn is empty.  The herd has carried the "secret" to the far corners
of the earth.  It's over.

-- 
Yours,

J.A. Terranson
sysadmin@....org
0xBD4A95BF

I like the idea of belief in drug-prohibition as a religion in that it is
a strongly held belief based on grossly insufficient evidence and
bolstered by faith born of intuitions flowing from the very beliefs they
are intended to support.

don zweig, M.D.