Beta is just recognizing our value as cherished site readers, by giving us more of that delicious empty space, tasty thumbnail images, and comforting large-type fonts, for the consumer on the go who doesn't have time for focusing on tiny letters in today's busy world.
As symbolic as this is, It's worth pointing out that the RSA Conference and RSA Security are two separate corporate entities (and I worked with both, producing RSA Security's own booth content at RSA Conference 2011). They do however, all funnel back up to EMC (y'know.. the world's largest storage systems corporation).
It's not like this is one of the cases where the, the wrong version flows well enough to let it slip ("12 items or less"), it even reads awkwardly. You'd think the writer would have stopped to go 'wait, that doesn't sound right' at the very least.
Everyone is an editor on wikipedia, many edits are entirely anonymous (IP address only).
what you're talking about is an Admin.
please tell me this is some attempt at sarcasm, and you aren't actually that ignorant?
Many states (such as the one I reside in) specifically ban the registration of firearms in their state constitution.
Welcome to the self-hatred that is working in the infosec business - any illusions we held about trying to improve the state of things for the greater good fell away many years ago when people started realizing that there was no profit in working towards making ourselves obsolete - casualties be damned. When it comes to computers, you're either responsible for your own OPSEC 24/7, or you accept that your systems will be interfered with in perpetuity. Nobody is looking out for you, least of all the infosec business.
certainly, if a government does it, it's not unlawful... and there's the rub. If interference and espionage with another nation's information systems are acts of aggression, will be ever see some updating of geneva/hague convention notions towards this? They both mention spies, but largely in the protection and treatment of them in habeus corpus situations... Do we even need such an updating? there is plenty of material on the legality of peacetime espionage, yet the sabotage issue remains murky as ever.
no, it was referencing the irony of something. You really aren't very good at this comprehension thing are you, so I think I'll take my leave of this thread now and give you some space for you and your bugbears to spend some time alone.
yet you remain blissfully unaware of my using it as a mechanism of irony to illustrate that if people are going to insist upon the term cyber -*war*, that perhaps some of the same perceptions and controls should apply to it equally? At least my brand of pedantry doesn't cause me to lose sight of the entire discussion as I crawl up my own asshole in sophistry.
Tl:Dr - "Whoosh!"
If these developers are so good at consciously creating vulns, you'd think they'd be better at NOT creating them too, now wouldn't you? After all, software shouldn't require
Reality does not support your hypothesis here I'm afraid, I think your tinfoil hat might have been backdoored...
Sad I blew mod points to comment on this article, but this reply deserves modding up. Your point about the redundancy of the term 'ethical hacker' is something I wrote about on Bloomberg last year (and was promptly libeled by Richard Stiennon in his column a day later)..
Because it is the common term used to paint the broader picture here (and the source of much debate in my circles). I used it so people would know what I'm talking about - it's this thing called a framing device. I brought it up first because that the is the larger context of the topic discussed in this article. Is the written word a second language for you or something? If you don't understand this, you're not the demographic I'm speaking to anyway and are still probably happily ignorant of the whole issue; for your own sanity, I'd probably keep it that way.
good point, I concur that laws are full of gotchas, and I was using ITAR as an example that a precedent has already been set once, not that ITAR is the hammer that should be used this time around...
There is no disclosure to these vulns, disclosing them would remove the value in them. These orgs aren't paying big money for vulns to have them
you can't sell something for profit that will be used in hostile actions, if you've already disclosed the information in public, now can you? The issue is profiteering from things that will