[123996] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: NSP-SEC - should read Integrity
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Green, Tim R)
Fri Mar 19 10:05:33 2010
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 10:03:00 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20100319135636.GA17876@vacation.karoshi.com.>
From: "Green, Tim R" <Tim.Green2@mms.gov>
To: <bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com>,
"William Pitcock" <nenolod@systeminplace.net>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
There are some out there......Infragard?....(shrugs shoulders)......
-----Original Message-----
From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
[mailto:bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com]=20
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 9:57 AM
To: William Pitcock
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: NSP-SEC - should read Integrity
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 08:44:29AM -0500, William Pitcock wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-03-19 at 08:31 -0500, John Kristoff wrote:
> > An ongoing area of work is to build better closed,
> > trusted communities without leaks.=20
>=20
> Have you ever considered that public transparency might not be a bad
> thing? This seems to be the plight of many security people, that they
> have to be 100% secretive in everything they do, which is total
> bullshit.
=09
I thnk I'd settle for operators with Integrity. those who do
what=20
they say.=20
--bill
