Conversation

Sep 15, 2019

First thing, this is a great thread on the OSS model and the inherent risks from bad actors in this space. Very worth a read. Second, though is the point about

@Snowden

. It's a typical bias from programmers, but a particularly stark example of it.

Quote Tweet

Daniel Micay

@DanielMicay

Sep 9, 2019

So sure, he's not a developer and isn't a highly technical privacy/security expert but he's trying to do good and he's one of the few people providing support to projects aiming to make things better. I see far more silly stuff in feeds of security engineers / researchers anyway.

Show this thread

Chris Dupres

@blaktron

Sep 15, 2019

Here he calls Snowden "not highly technical" because he isnt a developer. Snowden was an enterprise infrastructure/storage guy and got a pretty sr gig while he was really young. He bypassed loads of "highly technical" NSA security on his way out the door. He is highly technical

Chris Dupres

@blaktron

Sep 15, 2019

Why this is so funny in this context is that the thread is a programmer talking about how he lost his infrastructure and update capabilities. From an infrastructure/storage perspective that makes me think he isnt highly technical. I doubt

@Snowden

would have ended up there.

Replying to

and

I personally don't see what's funny about people involved in an open source project stabbing it in the back. It's ignorant for you to suggest I should be managing absolutely everything myself without delegating to others. Do you think

@Snowden

doesn't have to rely on others?

Replying to

and

I think dealing with insider threats is a core part of enterprise security and it seems it wasnt done here. That's ok, nobody is perfect. It's funny because you are calling him not highly technical after making a rookie admin mistake.

Replying to

and

Yeah, nobody is perfect. Some clueless people like yourself make incredibly ignorant and naive claims on Twitter including posting completely ridiculous unconstructive criticism. I don't know why you're talking about enterprise security in the context of a two person startup.

Replying to

and

You don't seem to have much of a clue about what happened and yet you're posting analysis on it and trying to criticize me. It was the company providing the domain name and infrastructure. The company turned on the project and broke the agreements. It wasn't a technical issue.

12:38 PM · Sep 15, 2019Twitter Web App

Replying to

and

I wasn't paying for the infrastructure. It wasn't my account. The Twitter account was mine and was lost due to Twitter being presented a completely false narrative and choosing to turn over control of an account without looking into it or getting the other side of the story.

Replying to

and

If you didnt own the infrastructure or the domains, then it wasnt your project. Sorry.

Show replies

Replying to

and

That's absolutely a technical security issue, and only the greenest security person would have allowed it to happen.

Replying to

and

I don't see how it's a technical security issue that the company the project was relying on and delegating to ended up stabbing the project in the back. What you're doing is coming from an incredibly ignorant/entitled position where you think I can/should do everything myself.

Show replies