--- On Fri, 3/19/10, Adam Stasiniewicz <[email protected]> wrote: > IMHO, I think you have it > backwards. I see strategic discussions (like > new crypto algorithms, technologies, initiatives, etc) > should be open to > public debate, review, and scrutiny. But > operational/tactical discussions > (like new malware, software exploits, virus infected hosts, > botnets, etc) > don't need public review. Rather, those types of > communications should be > streamlined that would allow for quick resolution. >
Fair point - I was using "strategic" in the law enforcement with things like "long-term undercover investigation" in mind, but your point is well taken. I think we agree that some things benefit from increased transparency and other things don't. David Barak Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise: http://www.listentothefranchise.com
