I'm sorry, I should have phrased differently. I meant: By the number of responses I've received that have been told to me "in private," or with a "this is not public info,"...
While I certainly would not violate those restraints I do agree with you. jamie On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 6:35 AM, Dobbins, Roland <rdobb...@arbor.net> wrote: > > On Oct 28, 2013, at 5:27 PM, jamie rishaw <j...@arpa.com> wrote: > > > It's clear that we all still consider open discussions on things like > this to be something to be kept to a small vetted community. > > It's not clear to me at all. > > Real-time discussions of specific events in order to coordinate response, > sure - it's important to limit those communications to the > groups/individuals who can do something useful to help in real time. > > General discussion of attack characteristics, defensive tactics, etc., > absolutely not - they must be shouted from the rooftops. > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > Roland Dobbins <rdobb...@arbor.net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com> > > Luck is the residue of opportunity and design. > > -- John Milton > > > -- jamie rishaw // .com.arpa@j <- reverse it. ish. *"Reality defeats prejudice."* - *Rep. Barney Frank*
