Thread context
4 posts in path
Root
@mattblaze@federate.social
Open
@mattblaze@federate.social
So while openly publishing offensive security techniques might indeed help criminals, that harm is outweighed by significant benefits. Every properly trained computer science student should understand
Ancestor 2
@mattblaze@federate.social
Open
@mattblaze@federate.social
The bottom line here is that while being the subject of attack by a deranged internet mob is never fun, sometimes it's the cost of doing business for doing interesting work. And for those who yell at
Parent
@mattblaze@federate.social
Open
@mattblaze@federate.social
I've gotten a few replies asking me if I regret publishing this or would do anything differently. No. I'm proud of this work. I think it has value. I would do nothing different. I am, evidently, remor
Current reply
Benjohn
@benjohn@todon.nl
todon.nl
@mattblaze@federate.social :-) I’ll look up the papers, thanks! … I wonder if a perspective here is that the entire idea of “privileged knowledge” is, basically, tremendously morally dubious. You note several problematic outcomes of it.
I think there is a distinction to “secrets”. We understand a secret is only secret when it is kept secret. We don’t expect others to respect the secrecy, that duty is on us.
With privileged knowledge there is some sense of requiring others to align with our own ideas. … I just can’t see that leading to healthy incentives, and it seems pretty guaranteed to create unfortunate power imbalances?
Maybe someone’s already written about this clearly, because I don’t think I’m managing to!
View full thread on todon.nl
0
0
0
