Conversation

This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Replying to
I'm not sure how I'm wasting anyone's time by pointing out charlatans spreading misinformation. That presentation is full of inaccurate attacks on all kinds of projects and technologies ranging from memory safe languages, various mitigations including ASLR, Linux and others.
1
Replying to and
Even the attempt at making an ASLR timeline is completely inaccurate and it has the usual security charlatan CVE counting nonsense. As an outsider, it's extremely clear who is in the wrong. Not mention this separate misleading attack: twitter.com/DanielMicay/st.
Quote Tweet
Replying to @banym
The original tweet presenting the results in a misleading and dishonest only looks bad for the person doing it, not the project they're trying to attack. twitter.com/gonzopancho/st The paper is also only looking at one part of the ASLR implementation rather than the whole picture.
1
Replying to and
I'm not seeing a situation where both sides are engaging in underhanded mud-slinging, dishonesty and bullying. There's a distinctly different approach, especially when digging a bit deeper into it. If you want to support the bullying and charlatans in this industry that's on you.
1
Show replies