nanog mailing list archives

RE: NSP-SEC


From: David Barak <thegameiam () yahoo com>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 08:35:08 -0700 (PDT)

--- On Fri, 3/19/10, Adam Stasiniewicz <adam () adamstas com> wrote:
IMHO, I think you have it
backwards.  I see strategic discussions (like
new crypto algorithms, technologies, initiatives, etc)
should be open to
public debate, review, and scrutiny.  But
operational/tactical discussions
(like new malware, software exploits, virus infected hosts,
botnets, etc)
don't need public review.  Rather, those types of
communications should be
streamlined that would allow for quick resolution.


Fair point - I was using "strategic" in the law enforcement with things like "long-term undercover investigation" in 
mind, but your point is well taken.  I think we agree that some things benefit from increased transparency and other 
things don't.

David Barak
Need Geek Rock?  Try The Franchise: 
http://www.listentothefranchise.com





Current thread: