Re: predictions

[Dan Kaminsky <dan () doxpara com>]

On Jan 15, 2010, at 6:14 PM, Nick FitzGerald <nick@virus- 
l.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> Dan Kaminsky to me:
>
> > > To the extent that predicting "more of the same" is prescient,  
> > > yes...
> >
> > Nobody is surprised by the attack. Everybody is surprised by there
> > actually being consequences -- against a state interest, no less.
>
> That's funny -- "everybody"...
>
> Oh,wait, I see -- you were making your post relevant to the list
> charter!
>
> Of course there were consequences and no-one worth knowing would be
> surprised by any of this.
>
> The only thing I find at all surprising is that anyone actually thinks
> this is particularly newsworthy -- such attacks by the Chinese are far
> from new and anyone worth knowing already knows how generally
> incompetent corporate and government institutions are at (proactive)  
> IT
> security...

What do you mean, of course there were consequences?  This is The  
Internet, The Land Without Consequences!

Major corporations under attack?  Of course. Chinese hackers?  Sure,  
why not.  Consequences?  Against a state interest?  With the Secretary  
of State of the United States of America backing up those consequences?

WOT?!

Show me a single 2010 prediction list *that* showed up on. Certainly  
wasn't on mine (unless you want to count it as an 'old and hoary  
prediction', but that's cheating).


> Regards,
>
> Nick FitzGerald
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.