Re: Don' see no "security expert's" round here ...

[Gadi Evron <ge () linuxbox org>]

Blue Boar wrote:
> Any security consultants ever lost business over getting hacked themselves?
>
>                                       BB

On occasion I watch people read my gmail account and thinking they rock.

        Gadi.


> Robert Graham wrote:
> > Mitnick is a security expert. I don't have much respect for the guy, and his reputation is more hype than reality, 
> > but he's still an "expert" every much so as others who call themselves "security expert".
> >
> > Just because you go around telling people be secure doesn't make you an expert. Any dunce can tell you to "safen up" 
> > (to quote Homer Simpson). What takes expertise is recognizing when marginal costs exceed marginal benefits. If 
> > inconsequential systems never get hacked, then chances are good that you are spending too much securing them. In 
> > Mitnick's case, since nothing consequential was affected, it means that he's not overspending on securing his 
> > upstream DNS. The only consequence is reputation loss, although the opposite consequence is free publicity, so it 
> > may be a net benefit.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >       
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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.
> _______________________________________________
> 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.


-- 
Gadi Evron,
ge () linuxbox org.

Blog: http://gevron.livejournal.com/
_______________________________________________
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.