On 1/25/13 6:11 AM, Warren Kumari wrote:
On Jan 25, 2013, at 5:11 AM, Alec Waters <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Joel,
if the third citation is factually incorrect in some fashion it should be
dropped.
[Waters2011] provides an example of how this could be achieved
using publicly available tools (besides incorrectly claiming the
discovery of a "0day vulnerability").
If the reference is deemed of value to the draft, I (as author of the reference) can
reproduce it at another location minus all the 0day nonsense put in there by the
"editors" at Infosec Institute.
<no hat>
Personally I think that that would be useful, although another option would be
for Fernando to remove the somewhat snide parenthetical…
</no hat>
new proposed reference created by alec, cited is more than fine.
alec
--
_______________________________________________
OPSEC mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
--
"When it comes to glittering objects, wizards have all the taste and self-control of
a deranged magpie."
-- Terry Pratchett
_______________________________________________
OPSEC mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
