> I don't know that the parent comment makes a good case for relevance of this claim, though, since The parent comment is responding to @tptacek's original com

> I don't know that the parent comment makes a good case for relevance of this claim, though, since The parent comment is responding to @tptacek's original comment: > (It's actually of dubious relevance to programmers in general). Where 'it' is the Design Patterns book. That's a more broad statement than just whether or not security researchers needs to read the book. The parent to your post replied to that: > I agree that _Design Patterns_ has little to do with security, but I think you are being a bit hard on it from a programming perspective. So, in summary: tptacek: Design Patterns has no relevance to security. It also has dubious relevance to all other programming. skue: It doesn't have relevance to security, but I feel that it does have relevance to programming in general.