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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181011074224.zzhh3btcj3kxw4k7@mwanda>
Date:   Thu, 11 Oct 2018 10:42:24 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:     James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
        Tim.Bird@...y.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH 2/2] code-of-conduct: Strip the
 enforcement paragraph pending community discussion

On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 04:37:48PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>  
> > I happen to think that the fact that the TAB cannot compel where it
> > cannot persuade is a huge strength of the system because it means
> > there's no power structure to subvert if someone were interested in
> > using it to try to impose their own viewpoint on the community.  But
> > that's just my opinion and I did write the TAB charter, so I'm probably
> > biased in this viewpoint.
> 
> The TAB can't handle it anyway because the privacy promise about
> reporting is incompatible with reality for three reasons (and I bet there
> are more)

Really you want to keep any reporting private from people on the TAB
because they're going to be interviewing you for a job in a couple
years.

regards,
dan carpenter

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ