"We believe that open inspection must be controlled and managed to prevent reckless claims from being made against our system for the protection of the public and our customers."

Whether this person is incompetent, or lying, or both, is beyond my right or ability to judge. But I'll say with confidence that he is one or more of the above.

Why? Simple: In his position, if I didn't have something to hide and wasn't stupid, I would welcome the most reckless claims, because if they proved right, I could correct them; if not, I could refute them. In either case, this could happen in public and with the backing of the most respected independent security minds in the world.

The only downside would be that I couldn't charge a ridiculous price for the software, because if I tried, anyone could beat my price. So I'd have to find some other way to profit from the product, such as to offer better support or packaging, or build hardware that works better with it.

Because of the above - while I still won't try to judge this vendors spokesman's motives - if my livelihood depended on making a good guess at it, I'd lean toward the conclusion that he was lying by being just a little disingenuous - telling a little lie in pretending not to understand something - hoping that his audience was as ignorant as he feigned, thus to buttress the big lie, which was that this concern was "for the protection of the public and our customers."

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/articles/11336/32579#32579