NSP-SEC

[thegameiam at yahoo.com (David Barak)]

--- On Fri, 3/19/10, Adam Stasiniewicz <adam at adamstas.com> 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