[fuzzing] Hey all

[Andre Gironda]

On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 6:31 AM, nnp <version5 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Erm... if you don't care about the topics then why mention them in your post
> and take up two paragraphs to do so?

Supporting arguments / proofs of problems?  Why is it that you only
read and responded to my technology-related points, which weren't even
addressed as questions?

> Or is it that you just don't like it
> when people disagree with you?

I actually do like it when people disagree with me.  I just don't like
it when people try to "one up" me to make themselves look better.  If
you want to talk about tools/technology then start a new thread.

> > To further my point even more, all of the vulnerabilities/tools you
> > named are still quite classic (and/or outdated).
>
> Outdated?  Do you even know what those tools do or how they work?

Do you even know what those tools do or how they work?

Maybe you should read a few books, talk to the authors, or read the
source code (or check the timestamps).  I can make suggestions or put
you in touch with people if necessary.

> > Back to the original topic, I think that any new certifications will
> > hurt us more than help.  I think this because "security professionals
> > / vulnerability researchers" are already a bunch of white males with
> > 5-20 of information security experience and close to zero experience
> > outside of our own industry.
>
> Nice generalisation there.

Thanks for answering the question that followed.  Next time I try to
encourage conversation and peer review around a topic where we're all
leaders, I'll try to exclude you since you're simple not in that
category.  If you want to debate every word that I say instead of get
to the point of the issues, I suggest that you keep these thoughts
inside your head.

It's ego-maniacs like you that perpetrate these exact problems that
I'm speaking of.  You would rather that everyone learn on their own,
the hard way -- just like you did.

Cheers,
Andre