[AusNOG] Fwd: LulzSec Leader Arrested in Sydney - One of our

[Joshua D'Alton]

I think you're naive that the list would be closed, and/or that journos
won't get access, and/or that they then won't lift a few direct quotes out
of context.

Things will always have the capacity to be taken out of context, even when
shared with fellow 'network' 'engineers', I don't see any complaints of
that from when all this furor originally came up 2 weeks ago, the complaint
back then was a few people getting their knickers in a twist because they
were receiving whirlpool-esque messages and apparently couldn't setup email
filters (or plain just ignore it).

Not saying this discussion from the perspective of the journo
out-of-context issue isn't a(nother) valid reason for a/the other list, but
it isn't how we got to where we are now.

Mark raises a good point just as I finish typing this, it does depend on
the media outlet... (as another aside, I think RFOs technically are/should
be covered under NDA provisions, its just they are rarely abused so it
never really seems to be an issue)


On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 7:24 PM, Matt Whitlock <mbw.whitlock at gmail.com>wrote:

> So I've been avoiding this discussion but I think my experience with
> AusNOG is relevant to this.
>
> I used AusNOG on behalf of my previous employer to assist with information
> sharing when things were going on with the network. After an incident in
> DC2 in BNE, my messages to this list were picked up by a journo and used to
> create a completely different set of events from what I wrote and from what
> actually happened. Because a few direct words in a sea of inaccuracy had
> been lifted from my messages, the article was riddled with quotes
> attributed to a spokesperson of the company. This led to me not using
> AusNOG again in this way.
>
> We also had a number of incidents where our PIRs and RFOs were published
> to AusNOG by various list members. This also led to times where journos
> would mine them to write articles. I would then have to ask the poster to
> not do it as the risk of an inaccurate article being written was too high.
>
> None of this information was bound by an NDA or particularly confidential
> but when used out of context and without proper explanation led to unduly
> negative impressions of the company.
>
> A closed list would allow such helpful information to be shared for the
> good of the community and would be understood in the context it was meant
> for.
>
> This is why I believe there is enough space to have both lists living
> alongside each other.
>
> On 27/04/2013, at 18:56, "Joshua D'Alton" <joshua at railgun.com.au> wrote:
>
> Frequently confidential? What part of NDA don't you grasp? Unless Bevan
> himself decides to post whatever tidbit of information that we didn't
> currently know (we could probably find it out easily enough if we did
> either way), then I don't see how it will ever be any more information than
> AusNOG contains, and with aforementioned 'leaking' there'll be no less
> press, lawyers, or bottom-dwelling scum either. (btw how stupid do you
> think such a 'leaker' would be.. obviously they wouldn't just setup a plain
> email to web, they'd strip out all the headers and so forth leaving only
> the posters name and the post.. theres software to do this on google..)
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 6:44 PM, Ross Wheeler <ausnog at rossw.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>  We'll probably get the stop thread message soon if we continue discussion
>>> on this, annnnd, I'm still amused at how/why people think the new list
>>> will
>>> be closed to the 'public'. It takes 5 minutes to setup an email pipe to
>>> replicate the 'private' content elsewhere.
>>>
>>
>> I've resisted posting on this thread.... but seriously????
>>
>> It would take exactly *ONE* message to identify which scumbag was
>> retransmitting the email, and then they'd be removed from the list,
>> probably permanently.
>>
>> I don't know if I'll be permitted on the new list or not. Either way, a
>> list free of "the press", lawyers, and the bottom-dwelling scum who would
>> otherwise misuse what is frequently confidential material is a good thing
>> IM(NS)HO.
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20130427/14d1ee5b/attachment.html>