I used to sit a few doors down to those others you mention (likely) and we would talk about that very fact. I personally don’t doubt agencies involvement in bad faith contributions but that’s a different matter than going after individuals.
Conversation
With that said it is reasonable to question organizations decisions re: optics for hiring. At the same time convicting someone for what they may have knowingly done, especially when people who’ve were breakers and/or defenders in their past tend to make good builders.
1
1
We should discuss the serious issues of individuals taking important positions without discussing the serious issues of individuals taking serious individuals taking important positions within industry. Because that would be going after individuals.
1
2
Disingenuous argument from a very bright person who is more than capable of talking about such and issue without going after individuals without proof.
2
1
1
Let’s talk about “proof”, Ryan. What is the standard of proof you require for non-malice in the most trusted position(s) in our industry.
Does it require declassifying NSA documents? What if we can’t. Are we defenseless?
1
1
It’s a tough question I don’t have a simple answer to but Hanlon's razor comes to mind when looking at this particular situation.
1
Your tweet right here implies you have a simple answer, Ryan. So if you don’t have one — maybe this isn’t the sort of tweet to write.
Quote Tweet
Replying to @matthew_d_green @konklone and 2 others
Disingenuous argument from a very bright person who is more than capable of talking about such and issue without going after individuals without proof.
1
I don’t have a simple answer. I want to draw attention to this issue so lots of people can talk about what the right answer to this problem is.
You are telling me not to do that. I don’t think that’s a good answer.
1
1
I don’t know how to respond to this entire line of argument without admitting I’m a terrible person and deleting my tweets implicating Salter, and noting her trusted position.
Tell me how to resolve your concerns without doing those things.
2
twitter.com/matthew_d_gree is not what either myself or was arguing and I don't think it's fair to portray it that way.
I wasn't blaming someone else but rather saying we shouldn't accuse either of them without evidence they were aware of any ulterior motives behind it.
Quote Tweet
Tonight is the night when a whole group of unrelated people suddenly and in apparent coordination decide to blame Extended Random on Eric Rescorla, an uncleared contractor hired by the NSA to facilitate its introduction to IETF. Fascinating! twitter.com/DanielMicay/st…
I didn't introduce their name: it was from your screenshot and their name was already being discussed in replies based on it.
I mentioned their prominent role at Mozilla as part of arguing that they we shouldn't be assuming they had malicious intent not to shift the blame.
1
Since they're listed as the main author on the standard, to an outsider (which includes me) they look like the one with the more prominent role in making it.
It sounds like Salter was the actual main author, but that's not how they published it, and it wasn't clear to me.
1