I'm sure you are right about Google's intentions, it doesn't really make it any less palatable to me however.
I'm just ranting really. haha On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Pablo Ximenes <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, I usually support adopting business models into processes that help > society, so I would agree with you on the "monetary philosophy". > > But the strategy here isn't (as I understand) driving pro's into the > program, but getting rid of unilateral vuln disclosures that happen mostly > without direct monetary compensation. So, I thing Google's program is > directed to those that already are willing to gain no money for their work > in disclosing vulns. Again, this is just my point of view. > > > > 2011/12/8 Charles Morris <[email protected]> >> >> Granted, but I know that vulnerability research can take a huge chunk >> of time out of a person's life, >> and without getting in to "monetary philosophy", I feel that in our >> current system, a person should >> be compensated for their time if they've done something useful for >> society. >> That's sort of the point of the way we use money. >> >> On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 10:03 AM, Pablo Ximenes <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I think the reward is intended as a symbolic token of appreciation, and >> > not >> > as compensation. That's why they give you the option to donate your cash >> > reward instead of keeping the money. I think what really drives >> > researchers >> > into Google's program is recognition and not compensation, IMHO. >> > > > _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
