Slashdot Mirror
Gag Order Fuels Responsible Disclosure Debate
jvatcw writes "The Boston subway hack case has exposed a familiar rift in the security industry over responsible disclosure standards. Many see the temporary restraining order preventing three MIT undergrads from publicly discussing vulnerabilities they discovered in Boston's mass transit system as a violation of their First Amendment rights. Others, though, see the entire episode as yet another example of irresponsible, publicity-hungry security researchers trying to grab a few headlines."
We discussed the temporary restraining order last weekend, and later the EFF's plans to fight it. CNet reports that another judge has reviewed the order and left it intact. Reader canuck57 contributes a related story about recent comments by Linus Torvalds concerning his frustration over the issue of security disclosure.
Are you fucking kidding me? That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. Are you hurt in the brain or what?
I think it would be much more diligent to make sure and look for the actual meaning here. You could do a lot of good for the world if you just realized that.
If the tangentials of the argument do not agree in your favor, then perhaps you should take a separate approach.
Join with the team already, quit pushing against it. I know you have the understanding to comprehend.
Can you really tell which one is correct? If you look at the analog mirror of the situation, it's easy to tell the reverse.
It's just like my Uncle Bob used to say: If not for the cows, then what of the flowers.
I think that's a good analogy to prove my point.
What part of the First Amendment don't you understand?
I'm guessing that would be "all of it".