RE: Product review postings (was Administrivia)

From: Anthony R. Plastino III (arpat_private)
Date: Tue Jul 08 2003 - 14:49:48 PDT

  • Next message: Alvin Oga: "Re: IRIX Pen Testing/Hardening"

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1
    
    We seem to have come a terrible distance from the original post
    
    >1.	If you want to post about a product  positive or negative you
    >cannot do so from a Huhsmail or other such account.
    >
    >2.	If you plan to post use your real name  or do not post.
    >
    >3.	Be polite  period.
    >
    >4.	Do not use this as a forum to take shots at your competitor or I
    >will see you and your company banned from every list we have here
    >(except Bugtraq).
    
    - - and it seems that a flame war erupted.  Thank you for
    discontinuing
    the thread.
    
    Before its done though, I would like to state that it is instructive
    to hear other people's points of view as far as products for
    pen-testing (that is what we're here for right?  PEN-TESTING?) so
    that I can make an informed choice.  I don't personally care if the
    person is using a REAL email address or a REAL name or not - it
    quickly becomes apparent when someone is touting their own product or
    taking pot shots at competitors - I think I can tell the difference.
    
    My point is this - why is it important for you or anyone to attempt
    to shield me from these things?  IMHO, this same sort of
    administrivia led to the downfall of bugtraq's credibility - not so
    full disclosure...  but I digress.
    
    There are a number of tools, methodologies, and technologies
    pertaining to the craft and I think it is valuable to see all sides.
    
    Thanks for your work and your good intentions,
    
    
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
    Anthony R. Plastino III
    Security Engineer
    Sword & Shield Enterprise Security
    8657775500 x521
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
    
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Alfred Huger [mailto:ahat_private]
    > Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 3:15 PM
    > To: Gwendolynn ferch Elydyr
    > Cc: pen-testat_private
    > Subject: Re: Product review postings (was Administrivia)
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > >
    > > How does that address accountability?
    >
    > >>You've stated that your concern is about the content of
    > posts being
    > >>inappropriate or damaging, and thus wanting accountability. If
    > >>you are moderating postings, than I'd expect you to drop postings
    > >>that are clearly inappropriate or obviously damaging.
    >
    > You would? You would expect me to censor obviously damaging
    > material to
    > the vendor? I think I must have missed something in your
    > earlier thread.
    > You think its OK for me to censor anything damaging to the
    > vendor but not
    > OK for me to expect people to be held accountable for their
    > musings I do
    > decide are OK? I am not going to re-iterate my previous
    > concerns because I
    > am not sure I am articulating them well enough for you to
    > understand.
    > Suffice it to say this exercise is not about protecting vendors
    > from negative opinions.
    >
    > >>Beyond that, if a vendor is sufficiently concerned about a given
    > >>posting, I'd suggest that they respond (as regularly happens) to
    > >>he posting with calm, factual information.
    >
    > Again, youre missing the point here. I am at a loss as to
    > how to explain
    > the issues at hand here in a more clear concise way for you.
    >
    > >I'm still curious about how you intend to determine what addresses
    > >are valid and accountable. Would a post from "Fook Yoo" be
    > allowed? If
    > >it was fyooat_private, Fook_Yooat_private ?
    >
    > Thats a tough one Ill give you that.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > Please point out to me one single instance of a
    > *security* vendor suing
    > > anyone (individual or otherwise) for a bad review.
    >
    > >>Let me point you to:
    > >>http://www.chillingeffects.org/johndoe/
    >
    > Great but it does not answer my question, care to try? Both
    > of the URLs
    > you provided speak to these issues in both generic and
    > specific instances
    > but none citing this industry in regards to Product Reviews
    >  the issue in
    > question here. Also keep in mind this in legal terms is
    > hardly an issue
    > specific to the USA. In fact this list and its moderators
    > are not in the
    > USA. Symantec SF is also not a US based company.
    >
    > > Please do not confuse this with Full Disclosure of
    > vulnerabilities and
    > > criticism of products. The two issues are wholey separate and I
    > > am guessing you actually do understand the distinction. I
    > have no problem
    > > with critical information being posted so long as the poster is
    > > accountable for his or her statements.
    >
    > >>...and I'd ask again, "accountable"? Does that mean 'has
    > an established
    > >>dentity online'
    >
    > Thats a good start actually.
    >
    > >, 'posts from a recognizable domain', 'has what looks
    > >like a real name', 'has provided drivers licence and
    > credit card as a
    > >part of list subscription' ?
    >
    > Yes and dont forget a blood sample. Youre expanding this
    > into an argument
    > for privacy and anonymity in the greater sense whereas this is a
    > discussion around one item for a small community (this
    > list). I suspect
    > you have strong feelings about the greater issues here and
    > I applaud you
    > for it but this is simply not the right argument for you to
    > bring them to
    > bear.
    >
    > > > There's a difference between polite frank and open
    > discussion, and
    > > > newspeak.
    > > I'm afraid you've got me there  what is newspeak?
    >
    > >>It's the language that the government expects all party
    > members to speak
    > >>in Orwell's 1984. It's an interesting read - I recommend it.
    >
    > Great, Ive gone from a list moderator to a servant of the faceless
    > Government Concern bent on spinning policy for the
    > subjugated masses. I
    > have to wonder if thats a  promotion. Perhaps you can start
    > throwing around terms like ZOG in your next message so we can
    > really
    > bring out the
    > conspiracy theories.
    >
    > -al
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > ------------------------------------------------------------
    > ---------------
    > The Lightning Console aggregates IDS events, correlates them with
    > vulnerability info, reduces false positives with the click
    > of a button, anddistributes this information to hundreds of users.
    >
    > Visit Tenable Network Security at
    http://www.tenablesecurity.com to learn
    more.
    - --------------------------------------------------------------------
    --
    - ------
    
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: PGP 7.1
    
    iQA/AwUBPws8fM230banfQtmEQK+kwCfTjekUjEBPOM8uNLz9fHF9Hq+WnsAoMSk
    xcvylTIyAkxxLQj/OM/2EHnk
    =AzYz
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    
    
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Lightning Console aggregates IDS events, correlates them with 
    vulnerability info, reduces false positives with the click of a button, anddistributes this information to hundreds of users.
    
    Visit Tenable Network Security at http://www.tenablesecurity.com to learn 
    more.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jul 08 2003 - 16:16:44 PDT