Re: Product review postings (was Administrivia)

From: Alfred Huger <ah(at)securityfocus.com>
Date: Tue Jul 08 2003 - 16:50:51 EDT

OK, this thread is interesting but it's going to dilute the list in short order. After business MST the thread will be dead. I'll be happy to entertain it person to person if people want. Now onto your points.

On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Gwendolynn ferch Elydyr wrote:

> I expect that you'd drop a posting from -any- entity that had abusive

I do too but that's not what your post said. To wit:

"If you are moderating postings, than I'd expect you to drop postings that are clearly inappropriate or obviously damaging."

Obviously damaging and "clearly inappropriate" are hardly mutually exclusive terms. But I digress.

> -That- has yet to be proven. It certainly isn't at all aparent from

I am not engaging in this discussion to prove my integrity which is what you're indirectly speaking to. This discussion was meant to serve as a sounding board on the issue of vendor reviews and poster accountability. You're looking for a witch-hunt and there is none to be had here. I've now gone from secret government cabal agent to mouthpiece for the vendor community and a dishonest one at that (is there any other type?).

You know a guy can only stomach so many insults. This is what you need to do. Revisit your meds (you're not taking enough) change out of the Che Guevara tee-shirt (he was bright - you shame him) and get some fresh air. After you've managed that and counted to ten bring yourself to realize that there is no conspiracy afoot here. No hidden backroom dealings or secret arrangements. Not everything needs to be dramatic. Save your torch and your personal snipes for a world full of issues that would actually benefit from them.

> Please try. I'm really quite curious to understand what you believe

I think we are both clear that's a futile endeavor at this point.

> I'm a bit boggled that you can look at both general and specific

I'm a bit boggled as to why you've not answered the question. I'll forgoe everyone here the suspense. It's never happened for a product review in this industry - ever. And I am really quite sure it never will. Being a vendor mouth piece I have the inside track don't forget.

>
> At any rate, I'm well aware that the list and its moderators are not

Nope, I am well aware of where they are as apparently are you. So should you ever (and I am praying not) see fit to pull sites based largely around American privacy and constitutional issues out of your bag of tricks, try to keep it in mind.

> > >>...and I'd ask again, "accountable"? Does that mean 'has an established

That's a good question. I think I would lean towards allowing it given they are well known entities and are already professionaly accountable. Both Rfp, Hobbit, Mudge et. al. all work and thrive in this industry and are well known both with their handles and without.

> determine whether somebody is posting from an appropriate "accountable"

I'm still trying to work that one out - I think it's tenable but have no answers yet. I may have to consult with my handlers in the CIA/IEEE/NSA for some sage advice on that one. Or perhaps get some more intelligent discussion out of the list.

-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.

---

Received on Tue Jul 8 17:31:21 2003