Re: [Full-disclosure] Evidence of fake security research from SecurStar GmbH

["Fabio Pietrosanti (naif)" <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Infosecurity Magazine was cheated:
InfoSecurity Magazine

The Register was cheated:
The Register

Network World was cheated:
Network World

And a if you read on google there was a lot of media coverage.

They was very smart to arrange that Psycological operations,  
unfortunately for them they was discovered not being able to preserve  
their anonymity behind the anonymous http://infosecurityguard.com  
website .

Fabio Pietrosanti (naif)

On 01/feb/10, at 00:48, Thor (Hammer of God) wrote:

> 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 (by me)
>
> Dishonest security: The SecurStart GmbH case (by me)
>
> Debunking Infosecurityguard 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/

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/