On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 9:54 PM Peter Gutmann via dev-security-policy < [email protected]> wrote:
> Paul Walsh via dev-security-policy <[email protected]> > writes: > > >we conducted the same research with 85,000 active users over a period of > >12 months > > As I've already pointed out weeks ago when you first raised this, your > marketing department conducted a survey of EV marketing effectiveness. If > you have a refereed, peer-reviewed study published at a conference or in > an academic journal, please reference it, not a marketing survey > masquerading as a "study". There are certainly problems with doing usability research. But right now there is very little funding for academic studies that are worth reading. You didn't criticize the paper with 27 subjects split into three groups from 2007. Nor did you criticize the fact that the conclusions were totally misrepresented. So it doesn't appear to be spurious research that you have a problem with or the misrepresentation of the results. What you seem to have a problem with is the conclusions. At least with 85,000 subjects there is some chance that Paul himself has found out something of interest. That doesn't mean that we have to accept his conclusions as correct, or incontrovertible but I think it does mean that he deserves to be treated with respect. I am not at all happy with the way this discussion has gone. It seems that contrary to the claims of openness, Mozilla has a group think problem. For some reason it is entirely acceptable to attack CAs for any reason and with the flimsiest of evidence. _______________________________________________ dev-security-policy mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy
