Re: Gee Why don't you teach then! Help out the community.

[Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu]

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 12:09:47 GMT, Ishikodzume <ishikodzume () beneath plus com>  said:

> I think we can learn just fine by ourselves, thanks.
> There is no worry of some 'art' being lost when security experts die
> off. The talented ones will always learn with or without the help of
> others - is this not one of the things in the very definition of a
> hacker?

"If I have seen further than others, it is because I stood on the shoulders
of giants" -- Isaac Newton

"If we can't see as far as others, it's because we're busy standing on
each other's feet" -- the security industry

Sure.  You can re-learn and re-invent.  But personally, I like having
all the basic stuff like fire and agriculture not getting re-invented
each generation.

> Did the current old timers need constant mentoring to get to their
> current level of knowledge? No. Then why should a younger generation
> of hackers?

Actually, if you go back and actually learn about the history of the net,
a *large* part of it was sucessful precisely *because* there was a high
level of interchange with places like Stanford and the MIT AI Lab and
the like. 

Find out why MIT AI Memo 239 was issued in early 1972.

Hint: It was released for the same reasons that Solar Designer
released "Smashing the Stack for Fun and Profit".

> It is my belief that this kind of thing can only be taught effectively
> by oneself, anyway.

Hmm.. how long would it have taken you to figure out the concept of
a buffer overflow without Solar's paper, or some other similar hint?

Attachment: _bin
Description: