Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Response to comments on Security and Obscurity
From: James Tucker <jftucker () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 16:24:30 +0100
On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 10:02:12 -0400, Barry Fitzgerald <bkfsec () sdf lonestar org> wrote:
I... tend to agree. It's a difficult question because analogies are useful if the person reading the paper has no point to base their opinion off of. However, I see two problems with this: 1) Perhaps a paper of this type shouldn't be considered introductory material. Perhaps the knowledge of the system should be a pre-requisite for reading the paper. Familiarity with the topics should be assumed. Discerning between the advantages and disadvantages between disclosure and secrecy isn't a small or simple thing and perhaps people without that level of familiarity, shouldn't venture directly down that path. 2) The above is especially true in the case of influence of public policy. If person shaping public policy is basing their opinion off of a (most likely defunct) analogy, we have a major problem. As I'm sure Peter is aware, this is probably more often than not, the rule in the shaping of public policy. It reminds me of the scene in Fahrenheit 9/11 where they were discussing the fact that the Patriot Act was passed without a single legislator reading it. This scares me a lot. Of course, this increases the need for simplification of the issues so that legislators can at least vote with a modicum of knowledge on a subject, but thus begins the cycle... Perhaps a series of papers is more appropriate, starting with an in-depth understanding of the ideologies from the ground level?
I agree. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- RE: Response to comments on Security and Obscurity Clairmont, Jan M (Sep 01)
- Re: Response to comments on Security and Obscurity Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 02)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Response to comments on Security and Obscurity yaakov yehudi (Sep 02)
- Re: Response to comments on Security and Obscurity Barry Fitzgerald (Sep 02)
- Re: Response to comments on Security and Obscurity James Tucker (Sep 02)
- Security & Obscurity: physical-world analogies Peter Swire (Sep 02)
- Re: Security & Obscurity: physical-world analogies Dave Aitel (Sep 02)
- Re: Security & Obscurity: physical-world analogies Frank Knobbe (Sep 02)
- Re: Re: Security & Obscurity: physical-world analogies James Tucker (Sep 02)
- Re: Re: Security & Obscurity: physical-world analogies Frank Knobbe (Sep 02)
- Re: Re: Re: Security & Obscurity: physical-world analogies James Tucker (Sep 02)
- Re: Response to comments on Security and Obscurity Barry Fitzgerald (Sep 02)
- Re: Security & Obscurity: physical-world analogies gadgeteer (Sep 03)
- Re: Re: Security & Obscurity: physical-world analogies Tig (Sep 03)
- Message not available
- Re: Re: Security & Obscurity: physical-world analogies gadgeteer (Sep 03)
- Re: Re: Security & Obscurity: physical-world analogies ASB (Sep 05)