Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email firstname.lastname@example.org
Date: Wed Jun 16 2010 - 10:06:26 CDT
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:44:06 +0200, "Jan G.B." said:
> Oh and by the way.. he's still lobbying against FD, as you can see here:
> "Full disclosure is cyber terrorism" =>
Dude needs to learn to be consistent. Kinda hard to support "FD is cyber
terrorism" while also whining about overinflated claims of cyberwarfare.
In any case, his basic thesis is flawed. The fact that "most people seem to
agree with me" doesn't in fact mean it's true, only that most CNet readers are
just as confused as he is. Full disclosure is *not* terrrorism, any more
than the weather service issuing a tornado alert is terrorism. It may mean
I have more work ahead, but that's true for a tornado alert as well. And most
importantly, I'm not terrorized - I'm fully informed and can take actions
accordingly. It's *partial* disclosure that's terrorism.
Consider the following two scenarios:
"There are bombs at the following 7 specific locations, set to go off at 4PM
local time. The trash bin behind 1123 Haymarket, in a box under the steps at
904 Maple, (etc etc)"
"The Department of Homeland Security has received information indicating
an increased threat against building that have a 7 in the street address,
cars with a Q or J in the plate number, and turtles".
Which one scares more people?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/