Re: climate gate and programming bugs

[Robert Graham <robert_david_graham () yahoo com>]

> From: Dan Kaminsky <dan () doxpara com>
> I agree with the assertion that the bugs described
> thus far are *precisely* like security vulnerabilities

My comment wasn't about the code, but the people viewing it.

One side wants to twist the revealed e-mail/code to make it look as bad as possible. They will take every e-mail out of 
context, and exaggerate every possible coding error.

The other side does precisely the opposite, trying to convince everyone that there's nothing to see here.

The core debate isn't about "implementation errors", but "design errors". Specifically, it's about whether the code is 
designed to adjust the raw data to exaggerate recent warming. More specifically, it's about the inability of anybody to 
double-check it, since these "scientists" do not release their code. We are supposed to believe the priests who say 
Earth is at the center of the universe, but we are not allowed to see either their data or method they used to arrive 
at that conclusion.

This isn't the production code, although it's related. CRU has promised to release both the code and the raw data. At 
that point, us coders can start the process of replicating the results, and looking for statistically significant 
errors.



      
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.