full-disclosure - Re: Help put a stop to incompetent computer fore nsics

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20050812225832.S57838@ubzr.zsa.bet>
Date: Sat Aug 13 05:09:28 2005
From: measl at mfn.org (J.A. Terranson)
Subject: Re: Help put a stop to incompetent computer
	fore nsics

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:

> ...and let me remind you, Mr. Terranson, that the majority
> of information that originates from SANS (primarily from the
> ISC Daily Handlers Diary, and DSHield.org), is far more
> substantive that the juvenile B.S. that goes on in this
> forum most of the time.

Hmmmm... Hit a nerve, did I?  How odd.

> But, of course, you knew that already, right?

Sure enough.  So?

> Being a "for-profit" organization is not the Sign of the Beast;

No, it is certainly not The Sign Of The Beast - but it *is* a powerful
incentive to see things in a certain light.  There is no possibility of
disinterest here.

> the last time I checked, it was a Good Thing (tm), insofar as
> being truthful, honest, and doing a service to the online community.

Oh, I wouldn't necessarily go that far.  Like I said, I realize it's a
minority position, and an unpopular one on top of it, but SANS is not
exactly one of my "suggested role models".  I'd place them in the same
group as ISACA, ISC2, etcetera.  There's a lot of great stuff in there,
but theres a pretty [un]healthy dose of evil mixed in as well.

Regardless of whether I personally agree or disagree with any SANS
policy/practice/whatever, the message here is a legitimate one.  That you
would rather take it as some sort of personal attack is strictly your
personal problem - the message is a generic one (that equally covers a
boatload of entities).

> - ferg
>
> p.s. You call that cheap shot "full dsiclosure"?

First of all, it was not "a cheap shot" - get a grip Paul.  As for the
"disclosure" question, it's as disclosure-ish as anything else here: look
around a little!

-- 
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.