Looks to me more like the unqualified person doing testing argument
is used as an escape from their faux-pas. When you read the initial
article, the author is clearly interested in the issue of crime being
perpetrated by using these tools :
Penetration tools clearly allow the breaking and
And if the author is sincere and it was really his original intent, he
should refrain from blogging from now on...
I have a feeling his employer will see to that for the foreseeable future.
At least in a professional context representing them as a company.
If he really meant it as everyone
Did anyone else see this?
http://blog.eeye.com/vulnerability-management/penetration-tools-can-be-weapons-in-the-wrong-hands
Penetration Tools Can Be Weapons in the Wrong Hands
Author: Morey Haber Date: May 3rd, 2010 Categories: Network Security,
Vulnerability Management
After a lifetime in the
Load o' bull.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:44 AM, Sec News secn...@gmail.com wrote:
Did anyone else see this?
http://blog.eeye.com/vulnerability-management/penetration-tools-can-be-weapons-in-the-wrong-hands
Penetration Tools Can Be Weapons in the Wrong Hands
Author: Morey Haber Date: May
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
For an interesting take on this see page xxxix in Ross Anderson's
Security Engineering (the Legal Notice). Apparently the debate over
whether or not to publish tools/techniques that could be used for evil
(specifically with respects to crypto) dates
On 5/4/2010 12:37 PM, Justin C. Klein Keane wrote:
For an interesting take on this see page xxxix in Ross Anderson's
Security Engineering (the Legal Notice). Apparently the debate over
whether or not to publish tools/techniques that could be used for evil
(specifically with respects to
On Mon, May 03, 2010 at 05:44:55PM -0700, Sec News wrote:
Did anyone else see this?
http://blog.eeye.com/vulnerability-management/penetration-tools-can-be-weapons-in-the-wrong-hands
are there any reliable caches for this url?
search for the shit you quoted returns basically this thread and
are there any reliable caches for this url?
Attrition has an annotated, but otherwise verbatim copy:
http://attrition.org/errata/sec-co/eeye-01.html
/mz
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter:
Looks like he rewrote it and clarified what he meant to say.
I think this is a lesson on why you really should proofread stuff and
ask someone else to go over your writings before you publish
something.
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Sec News secn...@gmail.com wrote:
Did anyone else see this?
