Is anyone out there using these reviews? It's just amazing that we are still going through this. SecReview is busting Adam for not credentializing himself, but I see nothing of how they have credentialized what they are doing. It's absurd.
On 1/2/08, Tremaine Lea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Regardless of whether your intentions are good or not in performing > these reviews, one thing is crystal clear. In order to perform these > reviews and have them accepted by those who would actually read and > depend on them to a degree, you need to have established yourself as a > credible source and have a good reputation. > > With that in mind, I think the vast majority will continue to rely on > word of mouth from peers, or well respected and long standing > companies such as Gartner or even Dark Reading. In my not so humble > opinion, you will not establish yourself as a credible resource by > engaging in petty disputes and mud slinging on FD. > > Worse, it becomes more and more apparent that this is essentially an > attempt to drive interest to your blog. I don't believe any serious > company would engage in the behaviour you have to date, so both your > motives and your method are in question. If you genuinely wish to be > taken seriously and treated as a credible source of information about > other security vendors, I'd consider starting again from scratch and > develop a better method of attracting professional interest. The key > is to attract the attention, not try and push your product down > throats. > > Another quick lesson : if a vendor doesn't provide you with > information, the correct thing to do is simply note that you were > unable to review their product or services, and why. To still attempt > a review with seriously incomplete information and then give a low > score is irresponsible at best. > > -- > Tremaine Lea > Network Security Consultant > Intrepid ACL > "Paranoia for hire" > > On Jan 2, 2008 11:08 AM, SecReview <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Adam, > > > > We've said this before and will say this again, this time to > > everyone. > > > > We would be more than happy to give your company (QuietMove) a > > "better" review if you'd enable us to do that. So far you haven't > > helped us to effectively review you at all. We tried to call you > > before our initial review, but never got hold of anyone. We also > > sent you an email before writing our second review, and you never > > responded to any of the questions in that email. If you'd like us > > to do a better review then provide us with the information that you > > think we will need to get the job done. > > > > Our current review is the product of your website, emails that > > you've posted to this and other forums, and your reaction to our > > first review. We haven't been able to find anything related to > > major accomplishments by you or by QuietMove, we haven't seen any > > sample reports, and we haven't received any answers to any > > questions about your methodologies for service execution and > > delivery. We even think that our current review might be too harsh, > > but can't change anything without more information. > > > > If you want us to change our review, we can do that again and we > > can do it in a non-biased way (regardless of all the rants and > > noise). We need you to tell us about your service delivery > > methodologies, your reporting methodologies, how you define > > specific service offerings, what markets you play in, and if > > possible sanitized sample reports. We won't publish any of that > > information directly, but we would use that to produce your next > > review. > > > > We want our reviews to accurately and truthfully reflect the > > quality and professionalism of the providers that we study. (In > > fact, if anyone has any suggestions as to how we could better > > "rank" security companies we'd be more than happy to listen and > > consider those suggestions.) > > > > Hope this helps. This will be our last email about QuietMove unless > > you request a redo of the current review. We will only redo the > > review if you are able to provide us with accurate information to > > help us get it done. We think that you should do it, because we > > think that you can score much better than an F+. (You're clearly > > not an idiot and you do have at least some experience.) > > > > -the end. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > The Secreview Team > > http://secreview.blogspot.com > > _______________________________________________ > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ >
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
