linux-kernel - Re: NFS4 authentification / fsuid

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: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0709201218470.14806@enigma.security.iitk.ac.in>
Date:	Thu, 20 Sep 2007 12:33:50 +0530 (IST)
From:	Satyam Sharma <satyam@...radead.org>
To:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
cc:	Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com>,
	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: NFS4 authentification / fsuid

On Wed, 19 Sep 2007, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> 
> Uh, is there somebody else that feels they're being enlightened by this
> discussion?

Ok, probably I got a bit too harsh with Kyle there. But what I don't
understand is why is it so hard for someone to accept they're wrong
on this list, thank the other person and just move on ?!

Even when you've explained an attack that wasn't considered, you've
explained why the assumptions of the scheme were wrong, you've mentioned
previous precedents, and *technically* refuted the other person's claims.
Still, people feel obliged to *stick* to their (wrong) positions, subtly
"shift" their argument (using new adjectives or qualifiers), whatever,
just as long as they don't have to accept they were, simply, wrong.

That just sucks.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/