[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon Aug 8 21:16:54 2005
From: jasonc at science.org (Jason Coombs)
Subject: "responsible disclosure" explanation
Georgi Guninski wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 12:58:06PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> Georgi Guninski wrote:
>>>the term "responsible disclosure" is a corporate instrument for
>>>trying to shut people up.
>>No, it's an attempt to create a market for vulnerabilities and
>>exploits, trying to mimic the underground's success.
> i disagree. market for vulnerabilities exists, there were auctions even on fd.
Actually it's another tool for asserting ownership of other people's
work product based on the premise that "irresponsible" equals
"criminal". I hereby re-assert my exclusive claim of ownership over my
own work product. I own my trade secrets. I own the exclusive copyright
interest in my written and communicated works. I am the only owner of my
original intellectual property.
If you are a corporation or a government entity that believes you have
the right to claim ownership of any part of my work effort simply
because you wrote a EULA or manufactured and sold a product of your work
effort, you are the one who is irresponsible. Your actions will cause
the death of others. If not in the short-term, certainly in the
long-term as good people conclude that they must kill others in order to
reclaim rights and freedoms that you stole from them by tricking the
masses into believing that you are more important because you have more
money. I suggest that you begin to act responsibly and fight to defend
the very rights and freedoms that you enjoyed in order to get to where
you are today. Stupid fucks.
See:
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,68435,00.html
http://www.granick.com/blog/
http://www.granick.com/blog/lynncomplaint.pdf
Sincerely,
Jason Coombs
jasonc@...ence.org
Powered by blists - more mailing lists