Jump to content

(moving on from) this great new website...


Guest Stephen Laws

Recommended Posts

[Moderator says] - I have split this discussion away from the original posting as it moves away from the original topic which was actually an announcement


Re: Bar Poll


I've noticed that an announcement has appeared on the poll page alluding to cheating in the voting. If this is the case the results will not be credible and quite worthless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was me. I own up. I wanted to see if it was a credible voting system on the site and am glad at least it is. I drink in The Vale so voted for my local. I hope I haven't upset things to much and I'm sure this has at least help to secure the voting process. NO harm intended and hope you forgive me for my brash attempt to secure a respectful result for my lovely local that deserves more than the 4% it had at the time I cheated.>:D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keith


I commend your honesty and I'm glad that our voting credibility stands up to your expert security opinion. Yes it did show a flaw in our system so thank you for bringing it to our attention. No harm done, although you had us worried for a while that we may have had to reset the whole poll but it came good in the end. You are forgiven and thanks for using the forum.


Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any good security expert would know that you would NEVER break something just to prove that it can be broken. There are other ways to prove that something has a weakness without actually exploiting that weakness. What Keith has done is unethical and I'm sure he did it only to increase the votes of his local, the Vale (which is overpriced, stale and rubbish IMO). I'd bet he wouldn't have owned up had the fraud not been detected, and would have happily seen the Vale falsely awarded best pub in ED. Owning up was probably just an attempt at saving grace as his actions probably could have been traced back to him anyway.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quaywe,


Hey you don't even know me but make such bold statements about my actions and views without anything to go on.I call that nieve. I am actually in the security business and the only way to find a weakness is to exploit it, it's human nature to do so and the best way (in my opinion) to find fault. It's how humans progressed though time to become more adaptable and intelligent. It's how we survive. As for cheating, it's not my normal behaviour but I did explain I LIKE The Vale even if you don't and explained my actions already.


I hope this is more to your satisfaction and if not my Father has a great salute "Here's to those who wish us well, to those who don't F**k them".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't need to know you in order to know that if you are in security, you are a junior that has a lot to learn. The fact that you say you'd need to exploit it shows me that if you really are in the security business then I fear for your customers safety.


If someone has accidentally left their front door open you wouldn't need to go into their house and steal everything in it to be able to point out to the owner of the house that they've got a security issue. You could just knock on the door and tell them that their front door is open and should be locked.


I know I certainly wouldn't want any security expert telling me "guess what, I hacked into your system and stole all of your money" just to prove to me that all my money could be stolen.


If penetration testers (a common internet based security test for you juniors) followed your "break it to prove it can be broken" methodology they would be out of business. If you really ARE in security then you would have known that. Your attitude only suggests to me that if you really DO have anything to do with security, it's to do with breaking it (or CRACKING - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracker_%28computing%29)!


Good luck at convincing me or anyone that you're nothing more than a black hat junior that thinks exploiting weaknesses in honest peoples web sites and telling them about it (only once the weakness has been detected) is a good thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He didn't say he was in internet security. There is a life beyond the web.

He's done a bad thing but doesn't make him a bad man. Let's not scare people off this nascent forum. I say if he's willing to come clean then he's welcome here. (But if he does it again he can sling his hook!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't deal with internet security but with public sector - private sector - commercial - retail businesses and some of the countries largest instatutions which I will not metion due to privacy and for security reasons. I am also not a junior in this industry but have been working over 12yrs doing this. I tried to explain in my post that I cheated to find a weakness as I had noticed other businesses had tried to advertise themselves by posting comments about their businesses as flattery and wondered if the pole was being manipulated in the same fashion.


Q, I would just drop the subject unless you feel you need to attack my actions some more, but trust me that it only amuses me to find that one person is so uptight about this subject. I might think you have had an experience that has left you scared in some way, that you might find what I did upsetting because of some invading you in some way and it might be good for you to get it out into the open by speaking to someone who cares for you.


Just joking :))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 years later...

Quaywe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't need to know you in order to know that if

> you are in security, you are a junior that has a

> lot to learn. The fact that you say you'd need to

> exploit it shows me that if you really are in the

> security business then I fear for your customers

> safety.

>

> If someone has accidentally left their front door

> open you wouldn't need to go into their house and

> steal everything in it to be able to point out to

> the owner of the house that they've got a security

> issue. You could just knock on the door and tell

> them that their front door is open and should be

> locked.

>

> I know I certainly wouldn't want any security

> expert telling me "guess what, I hacked into your

> system and stole all of your money" just to prove

> to me that all my money could be stolen.

>

> If penetration testers (a common internet based

> security test for you juniors) followed your

> "break it to prove it can be broken" methodology

> they would be out of business. If you really ARE

> in security then you would have known that. Your

> attitude only suggests to me that if you really DO

> have anything to do with security, it's to do with

> breaking it (or CRACKING -

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracker_%28computing%

> 29)!

>

> Good luck at convincing me or anyone that you're

> nothing more than a black hat junior that thinks

> exploiting weaknesses in honest peoples web sites

> and telling them about it (only once the weakness

> has been detected) is a good thing.


..........................................................................



Feel better now ,good. Do you know "the beard" p'chance



W**F

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The most recent one did, despite the council making it very difficult for anyone to object (which interestingly they were forced to change for the CPZ consultation and look how that went for them). I will dig out the responses for you when I have more time so you can enlighten yourself.   Ha ha...the language used by councils when they see the results of a consultation and need an out to ignore the views of locals...;-) Did you not notice how this only became a thing once the consultation had been run....one wonders why!? Earl you can bluster all you like but you cannot ignore the fact the council closed the junction to emergency services and put lives at risk and resisted all calls (from the emergency services) to open it for them. Surely you can't defend that  or are you willingly turning a blind eye to that too? Ha ha, which kind of begs the question then why so many of you get so vexed by One Dulwich? Surely you could compartmentalise their work if the above was true? I suspect it has a lot to do with the accountability that they are forcing and the fact some don't like it.
    • I believe around 57% of the 5,538 people who were part of the self selecting sample making up the original consultation, opposed the LTN. So just over 3,000 people. This was around 3 years ago now. I think there’s something like 40,000+ living across se22 and SE21 🤷‍♂️  The LTN is a minority interest at best. Whilst it’s an obsession for a small number on the transport thread who strongly oppose it, I suspect most locals quietly approve of the improvements made to that junction. …and we still haven’t heard who has supposedly been pressurising the emergency services and how (are we seriously going with the far left / the commies)? Is anyone willing to stand up and support the 'One' claim that people are partially covering their plates and driving through the filters due to inadequate signage? Again, it all sounds a little ridiculous / desperate. Feels like it may be time for them to start coming to terms with the changes.
    • Okay Earl, of those 'consulted' how many voices were in favour of the junction and how many against? Were there more responses in favour or more against? This local junction change is being driven by Southwark Labour Councillors- not as you assert by Central Govt. Also, if consultations are so irrelevant as indicators of meaningful local support in the way you seem to imply, why do organisations like Southwark Cyclists constantly ask their members to respond to all and any consultation on LTN's and CPZ's?  
    • You could apply the same argument to any kind of penalty as an effective deterrent.  Better than doing nothing. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...