On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 07:17:25PM +0200, Jim Thompson wrote: > > Sorry, this is not BS. The situation has changed, and we have to adapt. > > The situation did not change with the Snowden revelations. Anyone following > along has known what was going on for at least the last decade.
The difference is between having a theory, or having it confirmed by evidence. The disclosures changed the confidence level of a large number of people, some of the cryptographers, security professionals, or in general people concerned with opsec, and forced them into finally doing something. That is a net good thing. At the very least, we'll get a lot more of hardened systems overall, especially where it matters. > The only thing that has changed is that now outrage has become popular. Outrage by itself is useless, unless it's an amplifier, and results in political action, or at least increases the activism background. > How many of you people now questioning pfSense understand that Edward Snowden > despised classified leaks in back in 2009, and that he was not always the > champion of transparency that he has apparently become. Thank you for this information. It doesn't really matter about the origins of the leaks, or the motivation behind it, true or professed, just the end result. > ArsTechnica published IRC chats where he railed against a New York Times > story about the U.S. rejecting an Israeli request for aid to attack an > Iranian nuclear site and the United States' covert efforts to sabotage Iran's > nuclear program. > > "Are they TRYING to start a war? Jesus christ. they're like wikileaks," he > said in the chat. > > "they're just reporting, dude," said another user. > > "moreover, who the fuck are the anonymous sources telling them this?" he > said. "those people should be shot in the balls." > > Snowden, in the chat, also criticized reporting on classified information: > > "is it unethical to report on the government's intrigue?" asked a user in the > chat. > "VIOLATING NATIONAL SECURITY? no." he responded. > > "meh. national security." responded the user. > "Um, YEEEEEEEEEEEES.that shit is classified for a reason," he said. "it's not > because "oh we hope our citizens don't find out. it's because "this shit > won't work if iran knows what we're doing." > > "I am so angry right now. This is completely unbelievable," Snowden said. > > http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/06/exclusive-in-2009-ed-snowden-said-leakers-should-be-shot-then-he-became-one/3/ > > > >> It doesn’t contribute anything to the project. > > > > It clarifies a few things. Please don't knee-jerk about it, this is not > > going to improve things in any way. > > So “be a pussy” is your answer to handle this? No need to know. I don't know on what kind of the fence you are, but you're being a part of the project, and it's important to meet the right tone when responding to inquiries, even if you consider them meritless. _______________________________________________ List mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
