I'm sorry, I should have phrased differently. I meant: By the number of responses I've received that have been told to me "in private," or with a "this is not public info,"... While I certainly would not violate those restraints I do agree with you. jamie On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 6:35 AM, Dobbins, Roland <rdobbins@arbor.net> wrote:
On Oct 28, 2013, at 5:27 PM, jamie rishaw <j@arpa.com> wrote:
It's clear that we all still consider open discussions on things like this to be something to be kept to a small vetted community.
It's not clear to me at all.
Real-time discussions of specific events in order to coordinate response, sure - it's important to limit those communications to the groups/individuals who can do something useful to help in real time.
General discussion of attack characteristics, defensive tactics, etc., absolutely not - they must be shouted from the rooftops.
----------------------------------------------------------------------- Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@arbor.net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>
Luck is the residue of opportunity and design.
-- John Milton
-- jamie rishaw // .com.arpa@j <- reverse it. ish. *"Reality defeats prejudice."* - *Rep. Barney Frank*