| |||||||||||||
rpm: code executionrpm: code executionPosted Apr 8, 2012 18:55 UTC (Sun) by PaXTeam (subscriber, #24616)In reply to: rpm: code execution by rahulsundaram Parent article: rpm: code execution
> You didn't ask OP for any evidence for his claim that Fedora keys were compromised.
why would i have asked him/her if i fundamentally find no fault with his/her thinking? (i explained in previous posts why)
> So I don't find your style convincing either.
for that matter you didn't ask OP *anything* either, you went for a straight counterclaim (more like speculation, really), so it seems you don't find your own style convincing either ;).
> The latter part is just speculation and you are free to engage in it.
it's no less speculation than your own speculation (or as any security profession would call it, wishful thinking ;).
(Log in to post comments)
rpm: code execution Posted Apr 8, 2012 20:50 UTC (Sun) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
If you find no fault with someone who makes a claim about keys being compromised and multiple compromises without any evidence but choose to interject your own overreaching hypothesis to justify it, I have nothing further to discuss. Good luck with wishful thinking.
rpm: code execution Posted Apr 8, 2012 21:07 UTC (Sun) by PaXTeam (subscriber, #24616) [Link]
so in the end you fault others for what you yourself have done and at the same time not understand why your 'no other compromise ever' claim is wishful thinking. i rest my case ;).
rpm: code execution Posted Apr 8, 2012 23:03 UTC (Sun) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
You engage in false equivalence knowingly (any claim of multiple compromises without evidence is unjustified while it is not possible to ever show that any system has never been compromised). So yes, you are engaging in wishful thinking and I don't buy your argument nor am I convinced by your style. So we can agree to disagree. I rest my case too :-)
|
|||||||||||||