On Mar 19, 2010, at 9:56 AM, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 08:44:29AM -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-19 at 08:31 -0500, John Kristoff wrote:
An ongoing area of work is to build better closed, trusted communities without leaks.
Have you ever considered that public transparency might not be a bad thing? This seems to be the plight of many security people, that they have to be 100% secretive in everything they do, which is total bullshit.
I thnk I'd settle for operators with Integrity. those who do what they say.
If we had that, no secrecy would be needed. But anyone who thinks publishing everything we learn about the miscreants is a Good Idea, has never tried to take out a botnet or snow-shoe spammer or .... Secrecy sucks. If you think those keeping secrets enjoy it[*], you just haven't been bored to tears by working one of these issues. Seriously, most of the work is mind numbingly horrible, and I have nothing but the utmost respect for people who do it on a regular basis. (In case it is not clear, I do not have to do it often, and for that I think whatever ghods there may be.) Put another way: Do not dis those that make the Internet safer for you. They spend time, effort, and money - frequently their own - and risk much more (ever been sued by a spammer?). In return, they often get nothing. Before you question (and to be clear, I am not saying you should not question), offer to help and see things from their side. -- TTFN, patrick [*] I'm sure there are a few who get off on the thrill. But that's the exception, not the rule.