Search: Home Bugtraq Vulnerabilities Mailing Lists Jobs Tools Beta Programs
AtStake fires executive over Microsoft criticism
Ted Bridis, The Associated Press 2003-09-25

The chief technology officer for a technology firm that works closely with Microsoft Corp. lost his job after he helped write a study critical of the insecurity of Microsoft software.

Comments Mode:
Keep your mouth shut! 2003-09-25
The420Zodiac (2 replies)
Keep your mouth shut! 2003-09-25
Anonymous (1 replies)
Keep your mouth shut! 2003-09-26
Anonymous
Keep your mouth shut! 2003-09-26
Anonymous
Wrongful Termination 2003-09-26
Anonymous
AtStake... sellouts 2003-09-26
Anonymous (1 replies)
AtStake... sellouts 2003-09-26
Anonymous
where's the study? 2003-09-26
Anonymous (1 replies)
where's the study? 2003-09-27
Anonymous
Link to the CCIA report. 2003-09-26
Anonymous (1 replies)
Link to the CCIA report. 2003-09-29
Disinterested Observer
Code Of Ethics From @ Stake Website 2003-09-26
Anonymous (3 replies)
Well, you wanted to know why he was fired. Read below and tell me how many of these commandments he broke. Makes sense. I am not saying that it was right, but it makes sense.

As individuals and as an organization, we keep our code of ethics at the center of all we do. As members of the @stake team, we agree to:

Conduct ourselves honorably, responsibly, ethically, and lawfully so as to enhance the honor, reputation and usefulness of @stake, Inc.

Hold paramount the integrity of our employees, clients, partners and vendors

Issue public statements, advisories, and the like only in an objective, fact-based and truthful manner while in the course of our job responsibilities

Disclose all known or potential conflicts of interest which could influence, or give the appearance to influence, our judgment or the quality of our services

Neither solicit nor accept financial or other valuable consideration, directly or indirectly, from outside agents in connection with the work for which we are responsible

Respect client, partner and vendor information, sharing it only on a need-to-know basis

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/articles/7069/22581#22581
Nothing new for @Stake 2003-09-26
Anonymous (2 replies)
Nothing new for @Stake 2003-09-26
Anonymous
Nothing new for @Stake 2003-09-27
Anonymous (1 replies)
l0pht != atstake...wrong 2003-09-29
Anonymous
AtStake made the right choice 2003-09-27
Anonymous
AtStake was right 2003-09-28
Anonymous







 

Privacy Statement
Copyright 2009, SecurityFocus