Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Barack Obama <-- Not Appropriate
From: j-f sentier <j.sentiar () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 17:16:24 -0500
which propaganda ? you're spamming propaganda everytime you post. But i understand why now : http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1049327.html "The footage also shows an Israeli soldier, believed by the military police to be Corporal Avraham Schneider, picking up stones and participating in the disturbance, instead of preventing it. " Everything is clearer than ever. 2009/1/22 Avraham Schneider <avri.schneider () gmail com>
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 9:35 PM, <A.L.M.Buxey () lboro ac uk> wrote:Hi,I called for John Cartwright to setup a non-technical cyber security political full-disclosure mailing list some time ago, nothing was setup.because he didnt want to - and theres no demand?What are the solutions for splitting up full-disclosure into technical and non-technical conversation unless two seperate mailing lists are created?go off and create a yahoo or google mailing list for such drivelI second that. If he wants to have a list for different types of discussions, the best choice is to just open one yourself. As for getting 'traffic' there, I doubt people would stop posting here and start posting there (as nothing would stop them from posting it here).and let FD go back to what it was a few years back - readable and useful!FD is un-moderated and as such people can post whatever they want (security related or not). Usually, people would avoid annoying others with non-security related topics - but in the case of js-sentiner and co., one can expect some spam. Sometimes, when they decide to attack others (either with propaganda, or just because they are bored) , those attacked have two options - either a) ignore it or b) respond with non-security related posts and defend themselves (or oppose their propaganda). As far as readibility is concerned, that can easily be accomplished by either white or black list filters - i.e. if you only care about a certain vendor's patch notifications, put a filter to get them and blacklist the rest; if you care not to get any andrew wallase/avraham schneider/js sentier/whatever/whoever conversations - set a filter for that - and you are back with a readable FD. Just keep in mind that your posts requesting FD to go back to being readable, are not computer security related either (at least without wickedly twisting the meaning of the phrase 'computer security'). So for the same reason you find it OK to post your request (and it is), andrew finds it OK to posts his (and it is). Not trying to defend n3td3v or anything - but there's some hypocricy here.ala _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Current thread:
- Re: Barack Obama, (continued)
- Re: Barack Obama Peter Bruderer (Jan 22)
- Re: Barack Obama andrew.wallace (Jan 22)
- Re: Barack Obama j-f sentier (Jan 22)
- Re: Barack Obama Avraham Schneider (Jan 22)
- Re: Barack Obama vulcanius (Jan 22)
- Re: Barack Obama Jubei Trippataka (Jan 22)
- Re: Barack Obama <-- Not Appropriate andrew.wallace (Jan 22)
- Re: Barack Obama <-- Not Appropriate A . L . M . Buxey (Jan 22)
- Re: Barack Obama <-- Not Appropriate Avraham Schneider (Jan 22)
- Re: Barack Obama <-- Not Appropriate j-f sentier (Jan 22)
- Re: Barack Obama <-- Not Appropriate Avraham Schneider (Jan 22)
- Message not available
- Re: Barack Obama <-- Not Appropriate j-f sentier (Jan 22)