On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 03:01:24 CDT, Al Mac said: (trimming RISKS from the cc: list so Peter doesn't have to see what he already knows...) > http://www.itjungle.com/fhs/fhs062706-story07.html The comp.risks digest will almost never post a bare URL without some explanatory writing attached to it. Also, Peter Neumann is much more likely to choose an article that discusses *in depth* what went wrong at *one* instance (for instance, your attempted post yesterday about the data breach at OU) than "things suck all over" writing... Your best bet to get published in comp.risks is to summarize the OU incident in 3-4 well-written paragraphs, covering (a) what they did wrong (b) why it was wrong and (c) what the results were, adding possibly one or two of the *best* URLs containing further information.
Attachment:
pgp39uS7nwjSf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/