On Sep 2, 2005, at 12:25 PM, Alex Prinsier wrote:
MadHat wrote:
I am not sure if you were being sarcastic or not.
I was not.
First, this is about securityfocus.com lists, not full-
disclosure, just
so we are clear.
Roger.
The security focus lists are moderated. Things they don't want
people
to see don't go through. Sometimes there may be delays, maybe
so that
other portions of the company can write scans or signatures to be
able
to ddetect and protect against what is being announced?
Define the security focus lists... is
"[email protected]" from security focus? :)
Because you said security focus lists are moderated and this list
clearly says it's unmoderated, this list isn't from securityfocus,
right? :)
List-Id: An unmoderated mailing list for the discussion of security
issues <full-disclosure.lists.grok.org.uk>
First, don't reply in pubic a private email. Extremely rude.
Second, the question was not about this list. The original was a
message from SecuritFocus about their lists. So pointing out this
is an unmoderated list does not do anything. You're the reason I
replied in the first place. You asked, and so conveniently removed
from this reply:
"Do you mean symantec first checks every message which causes a delay?
And in the case they don't like the message they delete it? Or perhaps
censor some stuff?"
And my _private_ reply was to you saying, yes SecurityFocus lists are
moderated and here are some reasons they might be, other than
filtering out people like you. The response was not about this list
and I don't know what you are trying to say. I don't really want to
know either.
--
MadHat (at) Unspecific.com, C²ISSP
E786 7B30 7534 DCC2 94D5 91DE E922 0B21 9DDC 3E98
gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.us.pgp.net --recv-keys 9DDC3E98
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
