On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Robert Accettura <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Robert O'Callahan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Samuel Sidler <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > >> On Friday, July 27, 2012 12:18:38 PM UTC+7, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > >> > Another question is, "Should Mozilla compel its employees to > >> 'responsible > >> > disclose' work that was done outside of their Mozilla > >> employment?" > >> > >> If they're going to use Mozilla's name, I think yes. It reflects > >> incredibly poor on Mozilla and hurts its reputation. > >> > > > > Perhaps so. However, in this case I can't tell that Mozilla's name was > used > > in any way beyond the statement of biographical fact that the speaker is > > currently a Mozilla employee. > > > > I appreciate that such nuances are likely to be lost in the brutish > > discourse of the Internet. > > > > This is a very valid point. I can add a little more to that. I know > from past experience journalists sometimes will just grab the employer > or association of an individual (provided that relationship can be > authenticated as factual) to improve credibility. How does that factor > in? In the past I've personally even contacted one and asked them to > remove it when I thought it was completely unnecessary and unrelated. > > When I read the coverage, I personally assumed it was outside of > official work and the reference of the employer was just to make the > subject more credible by using a well known association (employer). > But I might be bias, so I'll just leave it at that. > > As I understand it, this stuff is the bane of many HR and corporate > communications dept's in many companies. > _______________________________________________ > governance mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance > This did leave me uneasy when I read it. I assume that Cody's employer had control over the process of informing the employer and what to do with the information. However. Mozilla is a community of people, and the culture of Mozilla depends on the attitudes of its community members. I think it does reflect poorly if Mozilla employees don't respect responsible disclosure policies. I think Mozilla's attitude towards security problems is a huge part of our culture. How open source handles security issues vs proprietary software has been a way we try to set ourselves apart and how we promote open source as better. So in that sense I think the article does reflect on Mozilla's reputation. But like I said there is probably more to the story. I'm not trying to say Cody did something wrong, I have no idea. Just that's why the article made me uncomfortable and it might be good for Mozilla to fill in the pieces. _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
