[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Full-disclosure] Evidence of fake security research from SecurStar GmbH
- To: full-disclosure <full-disclosure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Evidence of fake security research from SecurStar GmbH
- From: "Thor (Hammer of God)" <Thor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 23:48:46 +0000
What journalists, bloggers, and security magazines? I've not seen anything
about these people anywhere.
t
From: full-disclosure-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:full-disclosure-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Fabio
Pietrosanti
Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2010 3:41 PM
To: full-disclosure
Subject: [Full-disclosure] Evidence of fake security research from SecurStar
GmbH
Ok, now we have the evidence: The research was a fake security research
arranged for a marketing campaign.
They was able cheat most journalists, bloggers and security magazines.
I don't remember in all my life a so irresponsible and dirty marketing trick in
the security world, abusing of hackers reputations.
Read below, they leaked the IP of the anonymous author of
http://infosecurityguard.com and it's confirmed that it come from SecurStar
GmbH office:
Evidence that infosecurityguard.com/notrax is SecurStar GmbH - A fake
independent research on voice
crypto<http://infosecurity.ch/20100201/evidence-that-infosecurityguard-comnotrax-is-securstar-gmbh-a-fake-independent-research-on-voice-crypto/>
(by me)
Dishonest security: The SecurStart GmbH
case<http://infosecurity.ch/20100201/dishonest-security-the-securstart-gmbh-case/>
(by me)
Debunking Infosecurityguard
identity<http://www.lastknight.com/2010/01/31/debunking-infosecurityguard-com-identity/>
from Matteo Flora .
It's hilarious and unbelievable that a security company had done something like
this.
Fabio Pietrosanti (naif)
On 30/gen/10, at 15:51, Fabio Pietrosanti (naif) wrote:
Hi all,
i don't know how many of you have read about the analysis done on
http://infosecurityguard.com .
I have made a detailed analysis of their initiative and the result is that:
- it's most probably a camouflage marketing initiative and not a independent
security research
- they consider a security context where local device has been compromised (no
software can be secured in that case)
- they do not consider cryptographic security arguments
Below my analysis on this (read it carefully):
http://infosecurity.ch
Maybe it's interesting, maybe not, but for sure some facts are very relevant!
Fabio Pietrosanti (naif)
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/