nanog mailing list archives
Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations
From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 13:37:26 -0500
On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 15:04:22 PST, "andrew.wallace" said:
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Gadi Evron <ge () linuxbox org> wrote:"That peer-review is the basic purpose of my Blackhat talk and the associated paper. I plan to review Ciscoâs architecture for lawful intercept
Gadi Evron has absolutely no connection to this research whatsoever.
For the benefit of those who just fell out of a tree - anytime a conference paper abstract says "review", it's pretty certain that the presentation won't be cutting 0-day technical stuff, but a *review* of stuff that half of us already know, for the benefit of getting the other half up to speed. Also - note that the skillset needed to be a cutting-edge researcher is *very* different from the one needed to actually present a good review talk and have the information retained by the audience. (I've done overview presentations. It's definitely not easy to make the points "You should be doing X, Y, and Z, and here's why you should invest the time and effort to do so").
He is famous in the security community for piggybacking off other peoples research.
You apparently fail to understand that making other people's research well known in the community is an important role. Would we be more secure, or less secure, if somebody did the research, but then nobody told the owners of all that Cisco gear about it? (Hint: "pwned router" is never a good day for the network provider) Or would we as a community be more safe, or less safe, if <trollbait> SANS didn't do security traning courses </trollbait>?
Andrew
Security consultant
Is that what you're calling yourself these days?
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations, (continued)
- Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations Christopher Morrow (Feb 04)
- Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations Steven Bellovin (Feb 04)
- Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations Christopher Morrow (Feb 04)
- Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations Steven Bellovin (Feb 04)
- Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations Marcus Reid (Feb 04)
- Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations Christopher Morrow (Feb 04)
- Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations Mark Smith (Feb 05)
- Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations isabel dias (Feb 06)
- Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations Valdis . Kletnieks (Feb 08)
- Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations andrew.wallace (Feb 08)
- Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations andrew.wallace (Feb 04)
- Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations Dan White (Feb 04)
- Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations Brian Keefer (Feb 04)
- Re: lawful intercept/IOS at BlackHat DC, bypassing and recommendations andrew.wallace (Feb 05)