2 ms·
A bit of context, maybe it will be helpful for some: http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/170 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/170 http://se
by majke 13y ago
A bit of context, maybe it will be helpful for some:
http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/170 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/170
http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/294 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/294
http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/291 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/291
http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/286 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/286
http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/298 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/298
And a full email exchange:
http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/index.html#123 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/index.html#123
My personal favourite (in a positive way): http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/160 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/160
- acqq 13y agoSpecifically: http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/298 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/Mar/298 It seems that one guy not only trolled the list but also he either created new identities for more trolling or managed to attract more trolls as bad as he. The guy also appears to deeply believe he's right. It's still not fully clear to me if he is also the person thus described by the list maintainer: "I always assumed that the turning point would be a sweeping request for large-scale deletion of information that some vendor or other had taken exception to. I never imagined that request might come from a researcher within the 'community' itself (and I use that word loosely in modern times)."