From: madsaxon (madsaxondirecway.com)
Date: Tue May 25 2004 - 13:18:30 CDT

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

At 10:45 AM 5/25/2004 -0700, Harlan Carvey wrote:

>Valdis,
>
>I sincerely hope that you do not presume to speak for
>everyone...

He's not offering an opinion, merely stating a fact:
if whitehats are security researchers who don't
break the law, then they don't audit code the
possession of which is illegal. The only
debatable point here is the definition of "whitehat,"
but that's really just a matter of semantics.
This code is the proprietary property of Cisco.
Anyone who knowingly examines it or even possesses
it without Cisco's permission is in violation of
the law in most countries, and therefore not,
by definition, acting as a "whitehat."

m5x

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]