[Dailydave] Reminder: I attend painful meetings so you don't have to

[James Gannon]

+1 +1 +1
We as a community either need to learn to be able to speak the language of the people we are trying to influence or we need to identify those that can and allow/encourage/support/defend those that are willing to step into the world of policy and lawmaking, its a different beast and one that I know many feel shouldn’t interfere, but the reality is that over the coming years being able to play in this area is going o be increasingly important for people wishing to operate in the security space, the biggest players know this and have the capability already, but the bulk of the industry does not. This is a risk that we need to address and identify some response to. To not do so will be suicide.

-JG

From: <dailydave-bounces at lists.immunityinc.com<mailto:dailydave-bounces at lists.immunityinc.com>> on behalf of Chris Rohlf <chris.rohlf at gmail.com<mailto:chris.rohlf at gmail.com>>
Date: Monday 21 December 2015 at 1:50 p.m.
To: "dan at geer.org<mailto:dan at geer.org>" <dan at geer.org<mailto:dan at geer.org>>
Cc: "dailydave at lists.immunityinc.com<mailto:dailydave at lists.immunityinc.com>" <dailydave at lists.immunityinc.com<mailto:dailydave at lists.immunityinc.com>>
Subject: Re: [Dailydave] Reminder: I attend painful meetings so you don't have to

Im going to go against the grain here. With all due respect to those on this list/reply, this is why things rarely go our way when it comes to policy and regulation. In general, the government proposes something they believe is sane. In response, the industries loudest voices respond in ways that devolve into threads about LangSec. I don't want to spoil the ending for you but *No One Cares*.

Yes this is just a thread on Daily Dave but its illustrative of how the direction of these arguments often go for us. We need to speak their language or be doomed. As the intrusion software controls grow and change please call the Dept of Commerce and say "This regulation threatens American business interests. Here are our top 5 reasons why...". Any regulation that makes it difficult for you to compete globally will have long lasting economic implications. This matters far more than any high level description of esoteric weird machines we can think of.

I sincerely fear over regulation of what we do and while the deep technical reasons for why are important, they are not the argument we need to be making right now.

Chris

On Saturday, December 19, 2015, <dan at geer.org<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','dan at geer.org');>> wrote:
Andrew writes:
 | > Dr. Sergey Bratus did an excellent job of looking at how there is NO
 | WAY TO DEFINE THE STANDARD EXECUTION PATH OF A PROGRAM.
 |
 | Really?


Search term for this: LANGSEC

Or simply go to http://langsec.org

Papers from last workshop: http://spw15.langsec.org/papers.html

CFP for next workshop: http://spw16.langsec.org/



--dan

_______________________________________________
Dailydave mailing list
Dailydave at lists.immunityinc.com
https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.immunityinc.com/pipermail/dailydave/attachments/20151221/c9622501/attachment.html>