The "modern" game Microsoft plays is boring. It acknowledges and thanks researchers, often accepts worst-case assessments of impact, and fast-tracks fixes. What they don't understand is that our stories need an antagonist, someone we can name and pillory. Thanks, Claire Cranton at GSM.com, for giving us one.
Microsoft has more experience handling security disclosures than any other organization. The GSM manufacturers apparently have very little comparable experience. I'm just contrasting the two.
Comments
It's nice to see people still follow the old security PR playbook:
http://chargen.matasano.com/chargen/2009/4/1/how-to-hidehhha...
The "modern" game Microsoft plays is boring. It acknowledges and thanks researchers, often accepts worst-case assessments of impact, and fast-tracks fixes. What they don't understand is that our stories need an antagonist, someone we can name and pillory. Thanks, Claire Cranton at GSM.com, for giving us one.
What does Microsoft have to do with the cracking of the GSM encryption code?
Microsoft has more experience handling security disclosures than any other organization. The GSM manufacturers apparently have very little comparable experience. I'm just contrasting the two.
(I upvoted you; it's a fair question.)