Debian attacker may have used new exploit

JoeHill joehill-rieW9WUcm8FFJ04o6PK0Fg at
Wed Dec 3 22:11:38 UTC 2003

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 17:35:15 -0500
John Macdonald <jmm-TU2q2He6PgRlD5gtYiU6kEEOCMrvLtNR at> wrote:

> Far from proving that immediate disclosure has an
> advantage over delayed disclosure, you haven't
> even suggested any way in which it *might* have
> an advantage.

Read my post again, and the link to the Security Focus article, you will find I
have in fact done so, only you have chosen to ignore it.

> All of your arguments apply only to the comparison
> against non-disclosure; which no-one is trying to
> claim as a good practice.  That is a straw man -
> you put a false argument into the mouths of your
> opponent so that you can knock it down.  It does not
> accomplish any useful progress in the discussion.

I nowhere engaged in such a practice, I argued against *any* limits being placed
on the free exchange of information, for reasons I have already stated, and
have provided references for. Not once did I claim or assume that the "other
side" of the argument was no disclosure at all. As Robert suggested would
happen, this *is* getting repetitive, and now you are accusing me of something
you seem to be doing yourself.

So, to end the thread, placing limits on the free exchange of any information,
whether it is for some limited time or perceived good, is the kind of slippery
slope that leads to a regime **Hitler** would have loved ;-)

JoeHill ++ ICQ # 280779813
Registered Linux user #282046
"You tell me it's the institution; Well you know, you better free your mind
instead..."-- John Lennon
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings:
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns

More information about the Legacy mailing list