His analogy is not appropriate in this context. Security is a special case in which getting around it is a good way to learn about it. It's not the same as argu

His analogy is not appropriate in this context. Security is a special case in which getting around it is a good way to learn about it. It's not the same as arguing that wrecking a car means you're qualified to repair it -- it might be akin to a company hiring people who've been in accidents as a focus group for a new system that seizes control of your car and attempts to avert a collision. Most of the appropriate analogies are related to crime (hire someone who picks locks to test whether or not your lock can be picked; hire someone who breaks into houses to test whether or not your house can be broken into). This is because crime is a special case, but you could also imagine a search engine hiring black-hat SEOs, a casino hiring card-counters, etc. If you want something to be exploitation-proof, you probably want to see what happens when experienced people try to exploit it. It looks like people are seizing this as a PR ploy -- shame General Dynamics, and make sure people who Google "General Dynamics Hacker Ad" get to see you tut-tutting and defending virtue.