full-disclosure - Re: [Professional IT Security Reviewers - Exposed] SecReview ( F

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: <40ecb01f0712210400p213587b4q50086fc9140cd108@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:00:40 -0500
From: "Paul Melson" <pmelson@...il.com>
To: SecReview <secreview@...hmail.com>
Cc: secreview.exposed@...il.com, full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Professional IT Security Reviewers -
	Exposed] SecReview ( F - )

On Dec 20, 2007 7:19 PM, SecReview <secreview@...hmail.com> wrote:
> > 1.) What are your qualifications for reviewing these companies?
>
> We are a team of security professionals that have been performing a
> wide array of penetration tests, vulnerability assessments, web
> application security services etc. One of our team members has
> founded two different security companies both of which have been
> very successful and have offered high quality services. Yes we have
> all sorts of pretty little certifications, but those don't really
> matter.

So this is basically a tacit admission that every one of your "team"
has something to gain by smearing the competition.  At this point, I'm
inclined to believe that the firms you've scored favorably are your
employers.  You're not only incompetent, it seems that you're
unethical as well.  Not that I'm surprised.

PaulM

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/