Comments on: Let the parsing begin! http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/let-the-parsing-begin/ Full of sound and furry Mon, 19 Dec 2011 18:20:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Stephen http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/let-the-parsing-begin/#comment-223 Stephen Sun, 01 Oct 2006 11:56:47 +0000 http://www.macalope.com/?p=38#comment-223 Give it up. The term is "fisk," not "parse." The etymology may annoy you, but it way beyond the point of no return. Give it up. The term is “fisk,” not “parse.” The etymology may annoy you, but it way beyond the point of no return.

]]> By: DDA http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/let-the-parsing-begin/#comment-222 DDA Fri, 29 Sep 2006 14:43:53 +0000 http://www.macalope.com/?p=38#comment-222 Obvious wrote: "I, for one, am really hoping that’s what the SecureWorks people are planning to do at their next presentation: show the break on an unpatched Mac." If you check this entry (http://www.macalope.com/?p=37), you'll see that (using the normal parsing of the English language) that is precisely what George is going to do. If said attempt fails, I sure hope the Macalope (and others) hold George's feet (or whatever) to the fire. It's pretty clear to me that SecureWorks told George stuff and then hung him out to dry (hence his "few = 9 days" bit) by not publicly confirming any of the dropped hints in his column. Now everyone's credibility is on the line at ToorCon; by this time Monday, it should be clear where Occam's Razor cut. :-) Obvious wrote:

“I, for one, am really hoping that’s what the SecureWorks people are planning to do at their next presentation: show the break on an unpatched Mac.”

If you check this entry (http://www.macalope.com/?p=37), you’ll see that (using the normal parsing of the English language) that is precisely what George is going to do. If said attempt fails, I sure hope the Macalope (and others) hold George’s feet (or whatever) to the fire.

It’s pretty clear to me that SecureWorks told George stuff and then hung him out to dry (hence his “few = 9 days” bit) by not publicly confirming any of the dropped hints in his column. Now everyone’s credibility is on the line at ToorCon; by this time Monday, it should be clear where Occam’s Razor cut. :-)

]]> By: Obvious http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/let-the-parsing-begin/#comment-221 Obvious Fri, 29 Sep 2006 00:29:22 +0000 http://www.macalope.com/?p=38#comment-221 Despite all this language parsing, there is still no evidence that the original researches found a way to break a stock Mac with builtin wireless. You'd think that by now, with all the assertions and denials flying around, that the simplest way to resolve this question is to just demonstrate it. Stop talking about it. Just show it. I, for one, am really hoping that's what the SecureWorks people are planning to do at their next presentation: show the break on an unpatched Mac. And if they don't, I'm really hoping that someone holds their feet to the fire to demonstrate the break. They should also demonstrate whether Apple's patch fixes the break they said they found, because then they'd be able to say "See, it WAS the bug we found after all." In fact, I firmly believe that George Ou should be the one to hold their feet to the fire and demand that they publiclly demonstrate the break he says he saw demonstrated in private. It's certainly in his interest to be vindicated, and it would certainly be in the researchers' interest, because Apple has already come out with the only patch they appear to be issuing, More and more, this whole thing is reminding me of Fleischmann and Pons and Cold Fusion. Despite all this language parsing, there is still no evidence that the original researches found a way to break a stock Mac with builtin wireless.

You’d think that by now, with all the assertions and denials flying around, that the simplest way to resolve this question is to just demonstrate it.

Stop talking about it. Just show it.

I, for one, am really hoping that’s what the SecureWorks people are planning to do at their next presentation: show the break on an unpatched Mac. And if they don’t, I’m really hoping that someone holds their feet to the fire to demonstrate the break. They should also demonstrate whether Apple’s patch fixes the break they said they found, because then they’d be able to say “See, it WAS the bug we found after all.”

In fact, I firmly believe that George Ou should be the one to hold their feet to the fire and demand that they publiclly demonstrate the break he says he saw demonstrated in private. It’s certainly in his interest to be vindicated, and it would certainly be in the researchers’ interest, because Apple has already come out with the only patch they appear to be issuing,

More and more, this whole thing is reminding me of Fleischmann and Pons and Cold Fusion.

]]> By: Mike http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/let-the-parsing-begin/#comment-220 Mike Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:47:22 +0000 http://www.macalope.com/?p=38#comment-220 Am I the only one who thinks that George Ou does not really expect to be ultimately vindicated but keeps publishing this drivel because it draws web traffic (from both sides of the debate)? It's basically the John Dvorak, or macosrumors.com, business plan. Am I the only one who thinks that George Ou does not really expect to be ultimately vindicated but keeps publishing this drivel because it draws web traffic (from both sides of the debate)? It’s basically the John Dvorak, or macosrumors.com, business plan.

]]> By: Joel http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/let-the-parsing-begin/#comment-219 Joel Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:32:30 +0000 http://www.macalope.com/?p=38#comment-219 Hey! Brian could be "Griffin" and George could be "Sabine." Hey! Brian could be “Griffin” and George could be “Sabine.”

]]> By: Ben http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/let-the-parsing-begin/#comment-218 Ben Thu, 28 Sep 2006 22:50:34 +0000 http://www.macalope.com/?p=38#comment-218 When I first read Burke's analysis, I thought "He's pinning a lot of this on a strict technical interpretation of the word 'only' in Lynn's statement." If you instead parse Lynn's statements as ordinary language, rather than as the language of a written legal contract, you get a rather different picture. And if I had some random presenter at Black Hat say they could break into my house in 60 seconds or less, I'd sure as hell do my own freakin' security audit, especially if said presenters weren't forthcoming in a timely and comprehansive way regarding exactly WTF they say they found. And especially if there were a lot of people lining up behind the presenters saying things like "I've seen them break in, and it's real." You know, like maybe be cautious and not act like my security and software was perfectly bug-free? When I first read Burke’s analysis, I thought “He’s pinning a lot of this on a strict technical interpretation of the word ‘only’ in Lynn’s statement.” If you instead parse Lynn’s statements as ordinary language, rather than as the language of a written legal contract, you get a rather different picture.

And if I had some random presenter at Black Hat say they could break into my house in 60 seconds or less, I’d sure as hell do my own freakin’ security audit, especially if said presenters weren’t forthcoming in a timely and comprehansive way regarding exactly WTF they say they found. And especially if there were a lot of people lining up behind the presenters saying things like “I’ve seen them break in, and it’s real.” You know, like maybe be cautious and not act like my security and software was perfectly bug-free?

]]> By: Alex http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/let-the-parsing-begin/#comment-217 Alex Thu, 28 Sep 2006 21:04:19 +0000 http://www.macalope.com/?p=38#comment-217 Am I the only one thinking this Brian Burke guy and George Ou are one and the same? Judging by the incessant self-celebrating tone and the repeated "George" interspersing (as noted), and how Ou ends every article which host his "friend" by complimenting him for his brilliancy... I'd say it's a classic example of dual personality... Am I the only one thinking this Brian Burke guy and George Ou are one and the same? Judging by the incessant self-celebrating tone and the repeated “George” interspersing (as noted), and how Ou ends every article which host his “friend” by complimenting him for his brilliancy… I’d say it’s a classic example of dual personality…

]]> By: Jim Gleeson http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/let-the-parsing-begin/#comment-216 Jim Gleeson Thu, 28 Sep 2006 21:02:37 +0000 http://www.macalope.com/?p=38#comment-216 I think the other 90% want us to be just as miserable as they are so in order to start down that path they have to make things up. Now they are backpedaling and looking over their shoulder when asked to provide ample evidence. Because Apple is not going to shovel an exploit under the carpet and ignore it. I think the other 90% want us to be just as miserable as they are so in order to start down that path they have to make things up. Now they are backpedaling and looking over their shoulder when asked to provide ample evidence. Because Apple is not going to shovel an exploit under the carpet and ignore it.

]]> By: grovberg http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/let-the-parsing-begin/#comment-215 grovberg Wed, 27 Sep 2006 19:37:51 +0000 http://www.macalope.com/?p=38#comment-215 Wait. I think I've figured it out. In the analogy, the Audi is a metaphor for life. Right? Right? Crap. My genuine reaction to Burke's response was quite literally almost exactly like LKM's comment. Complete and utter bafflement. Wait. I think I’ve figured it out. In the analogy, the Audi is a metaphor for life. Right? Right? Crap.

My genuine reaction to Burke’s response was quite literally almost exactly like LKM’s comment. Complete and utter bafflement.

]]> By: Macalope http://www.macalope.com/2006/09/26/let-the-parsing-begin/#comment-214 Macalope Tue, 26 Sep 2006 19:18:37 +0000 http://www.macalope.com/?p=38#comment-214 Oh, good, so it's not just the Macalope who noticed that. Oh, good, so it’s not just the Macalope who noticed that.

]]>