I rarely participate in public political discussions but I have to say something:
In the United States if the government sent someonean NSL - they would not be allowed to comment. You have been told that already and have been told that to the best knowledge of the people involved, no other requests have been received. You have turned this into a political discussion and I think at least I do not care about your political views. Yes, we all know NSA is evil and no, most of us do not like it. Now, do you have a technical question on how to "protect yourself" from the evil spooks? If not, please go away, this is becoming boring. Yes, it is an open public list but it does not mean it is your outlet to vent and abuse others. My $.02 On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 04:23:20PM +0300, Thinker Rix wrote: > On 2013-10-10 16:08, Giles Coochey wrote: > >On 10/10/2013 13:55, Ian Bowers wrote: > >>On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:17 AM, Alexandre Paradis > >><alexandre.para...@gmail.com > >><mailto:alexandre.para...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> indeed, i vote to continue. Because you don't mind being > >> overlooked by NSA doesn't mean everybody don't care. > >> > >> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Rüdiger G. Biernat > >> <rgbier...@rgbiernat.homelinux.org > >> <mailto:rgbier...@rgbiernat.homelinux.org>> wrote: > >> > >> This discussion about security/NSA/encryption IS important. > >> Please go on. > >> > >> > >>Whether or not this is an important conversation is irrelevant. > >>This is the wrong place to have the conversation. > >> > >>I tried to turn this back into a product support discussion in > >>the last thread but sadly my comments were not among those > >>cherry picked. This discussion does not suit the purpose of > >>this list. I see a bunch of hard working people reacting to > >>their product's integrity being continuously questioned despite > >>having all questions answered, and a few entitled consumers who > >>can't be bothered to figure out technology well enough to come > >>to their own conclusion on its integrity. As well as a bunch > >>of people that want this discussion to go someplace more > >>appropriate. The "concerned" parties are not concerned enough > >>to learn how to read code. So you're paranoid, just not > >>paranoid enough to actually learn how to answer your own > >>questions. > >> > >>Unless there is an issue someone is having making a VPN work or > >>getting NAT running right, this is the wrong place to hold this > >>discussion. If you're having an issue with this pfSense, > >>networking protocols, or logical opertaion of the device, great! > >>let's talk about it! I'm actually very good at these things, > >>and I'd like to spend time helping people with network or > >>network security related operational problems. Otherwise, > >>please find the email addresses of all the people who shown an > >>interest in participating in this discussion, and send an email > >>out to that list of people to discuss it among yourselves. > >> > >*BLINK!* > > > >Incredible!!!! the way I am seeing the reaction to the initial > >question, and trying to query very valid points are now leading me > >to seriously reconsider the potential risk I have in continuing to > >use pfsense as a security tool. > > This is *exactly* the way I feel about this whole sensation that we > are witnessing here! Some reactions are truly incredible! > > >The about list on the mailman page states: "pfSense support and > >discussion list"... > > Correct! > > But I guess those who waste our time by telling us we should shut up > and walk away would like to rename the list to e.g. "Happy shallow > chatting of pfSense fan boys who never dare to ask any critical > question about their beloved firewall-distro that they take to bed > each night" or something similar. > > Self-censorship in a security software forum when it comes to > discuss the security level of the security software! It's absolutely > crazy!! > > >This thread is clearly about discussing pfsense, therefore it is > >on-topic, I could equally take the stance, take your technical > >discussions to the dev list, however I am not the type of > >exclusive close-minded minded person that you appear to be. Please > >stop hijacking this thread. > > FACK!! > > Regards > Thinker Rix > _______________________________________________ > List mailing list > List@lists.pfsense.org > http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list _______________________________________________ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
