On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 09:52:40PM +0100, Per Jessen wrote:

John Andersen wrote:

...

Any clues as to how this was pulled off? http://techrights.org/2017/02/09/microfocus-suse-hush-hush/

(The hack I mean, not the alleged stony silence).

Wordpress 4.7.1 was compromised, and it took us a little to long to get upgraded to 4.7.2.

And Roy Schestowitz is kind of a known troll who hates SUSE. Ciao, Marcus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 02/10/2017 12:58 PM, Marcus Meissner wrote:

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 09:52:40PM +0100, Per Jessen wrote:

...

John Andersen wrote:

...

Any clues as to how this was pulled off? http://techrights.org/2017/02/09/microfocus-suse-hush-hush/

(The hack I mean, not the alleged stony silence). Wordpress 4.7.1 was compromised, and it took us a little to long to get upgraded to 4.7.2. And Roy Schestowitz is kind of a known troll who hates SUSE.

Ciao, Marcus

Is the report accurate? If so, does it matter if he hates SUSE? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

...

And Roy Schestowitz is kind of a known troll who hates SUSE.

Ciao, Marcus

Is the report accurate? If so, does it matter if he hates SUSE? 1 - that opensuse news was hacked - yes its all over the internet since at least (CIO 07-02-2017) 2 - that it was hush hush - no [see 1] + techrights article dated 09-02-2017 + see richard brown interview 3 - the "a known troll who hates SUSE" comment makes no assertion as to the validity of the article. there is therefore no correspondence between "acurate and hates suse" so your question doesnt make any sense. 4 - does slander based on conjecture of a hypotheticle strike you as accurate? "If someone injected a back door inside SLED and SLES, SUSE would probably say not a thing, only belatedly removing it and then lying about the whole thing, just like Microsoft does".

did you even read the comment made, or the techrights article before you wrote this? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 2/10/17 2:19 PM, nicholas wrote:

...

...

...

And Roy Schestowitz is kind of a known troll who hates SUSE.

Ciao, Marcus

Is the report accurate? If so, does it matter if he hates SUSE?

1 - that opensuse news was hacked - yes its all over the internet since at least (CIO 07-02-2017) 2 - that it was hush hush - no [see 1] + techrights article dated 09-02-2017 + see richard brown interview 3 - the "a known troll who hates SUSE" comment makes no assertion as to the validity of the article. there is therefore no correspondence between "acurate and hates suse" so your question doesnt make any sense. 4 - does slander based on conjecture of a hypotheticle strike you as accurate? "If someone injected a back door inside SLED and SLES, SUSE would probably say not a thing, only belatedly removing it and then lying about the whole thing, just like Microsoft does".

did you even read the comment made, or the techrights article before you wrote this?

I read both several days ago.. And wondered why no mention was made here.

I also noted the not so subtle attempt to discount the report under "he hates SUSE" without commenting one way or another on it's accuracy leading to my question.

I also note the continuing effort to discount any comments using similar "tone" arguments.

The entire thing "feels" like an effort to pretend nothing happened when a simple announcement of the incident might have diffused it.

methinks they doth protest too loudly. i write a reponse based on fact and you call it a "tone argument" ; wheras you write "The entire thing "feels" like an effort to pretend nothing happened" 1 - "feels" WTF 2 - "an effort to pretend nothing happened" when it all over the internet? when the troll comment IMMEDIATLY follows a declaration of the fact that it did happen and the cause. 3 - "methinks they doth protest too loudly." im an ordinary user, who do you imply is protesting? suse? 4 - "I also note the continuing effort to discount any comments", your arguments are exaggerations, baseless accusations and FUD, and challenging

On Friday, 10 February 2017 14:44:50 CET Bruce Ferrell wrote: them does not imply a "cover up" 5 - im a user challenging your troll like comments - "continuing effort" bit of an exaduration isnt it? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 02/10/2017 02:19 PM, nicholas wrote:

...

...

And Roy Schestowitz is kind of a known troll who hates SUSE.

Ciao, Marcus Is the report accurate? If so, does it matter if he hates SUSE? 1 - that opensuse news was hacked - yes its all over the internet since at least (CIO 07-02-2017) 2 - that it was hush hush - no [see 1] + techrights article dated 09-02-2017 + see richard brown interview 3 - the "a known troll who hates SUSE" comment makes no assertion as to the validity of the article. there is therefore no correspondence between "acurate and hates suse" so your question doesnt make any sense. 4 - does slander based on conjecture of a hypotheticle strike you as accurate? "If someone injected a back door inside SLED and SLES, SUSE would probably say not a thing, only belatedly removing it and then lying about the whole thing, just like Microsoft does".

did you even read the comment made, or the techrights article before you wrote this?

Yes, the Techrights article IS the one I saw of February 9, 2017. No, I did NOT see the breach mention on ANY OpenSUSE lists (I monitor several) and wondered and had it on my agenda to ask about it when I had a few moments. Nicholas, since you're "simply a user", why so heated in both your responses to me and vehemence over all. I too am "just a SUSE user" since SUSE 7.x since before the stupid Novell/MS deal. I'm also an IT professional with over 30 years experience. Modern standard operating practice is to publicly and officially acknowledge such breaches. Seeing an announcement on a third party site of a breach with NO announcements here, even if rapidly corrected, struck me as odd at best and possibly false. The "heat" seen on these lists when the breach was asked about, starts looking like bunker mentality. And that raises the curiosity level even higher... Was the article inaccurate? Was it a troll? Why are official channels NOT making an announcement? All bringing credibility of all parties into question. So I asked... And got even MORE heat! So did others. Marcus, I DO appreciate you taking the time to make the simple statement that it did happen, what happened and that no significant information was compromised. It's a thankless job. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 2/11/17 12:18 PM, nicholas wrote:
> On Friday, 10 February 2017 17:17:15 CET Bruce Ferrell wrote:
>> On 02/10/2017 02:19 PM, nicholas wrote:
>>>>> And Roy Schestowitz is kind of a known troll who hates SUSE.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ciao, Marcus
>>>> Is the report accurate?  If so, does it matter if he hates SUSE?
>>> 1 - that opensuse news was hacked - yes its all over the internet since at
>>> least (CIO 07-02-2017)
>>> 2 - that it was hush hush - no [see 1] + techrights article dated
>>> 09-02-2017 + see richard brown interview
>>> 3 - the "a known troll who hates SUSE" comment makes no assertion as to
>>> the
>>> validity of the article. there is therefore no correspondence between
>>> "acurate and hates suse" so your question doesnt make any sense.
>>> 4 - does slander based on conjecture of a hypotheticle strike you as
>>> accurate? "If someone injected a back door inside SLED and SLES, SUSE
>>> would probably say not a thing, only belatedly removing it and then lying
>>> about the whole thing, just like Microsoft does".
>>>
>>> did you even read the comment made, or the techrights article before you
>>> wrote this?
>> Yes, the Techrights article IS the one I saw of February 9, 2017.  No, I did
>> NOT see the breach mention on ANY OpenSUSE lists (I monitor several) and
>> wondered and had it on my agenda to ask about it when I had a few moments.
>>
>> Nicholas, since you're "simply a user",  why so heated in both your
>> responses to me and vehemence over all.  I too am "just a SUSE user" since
>> SUSE 7.x since before the stupid Novell/MS deal.
>>
>> I'm also an IT professional with over 30 years experience. Modern standard
>> operating practice is to publicly and officially acknowledge such breaches.
>>   Seeing an announcement on a third party site of a breach with NO
>> announcements here, even if rapidly corrected, struck me as odd at best and
>> possibly false.
>>
>> The "heat" seen on these lists when the breach was asked about, starts
>> looking like bunker mentality. And that raises the curiosity level even
>> higher... Was the article inaccurate?  Was it a troll?  Why are official
>> channels NOT making an announcement? All bringing credibility of all
>> parties into question.  So I asked... And got even MORE heat! So did
>> others.
>>
>> Marcus, I DO appreciate you taking the time to make the simple statement
>> that it did happen, what happened and that no significant information was
>> compromised.  It's a thankless job.
> my response is to the style, content and basis of your "arguments",
> - tying the simple fact of the attack to the "truth" of wider accusations
> without foundation given in techrights. (the article has zero journalistic
> credability)
> - your constant exaggerations. (who are the OTHERS who have recieved HEAT for
> asking questions?, a website DEFACEMENT is NOT a BREACH, saying my 2 messages
> are a "continuing effort to discount any comments" from suse)
> - your constant wink wink style accusations.
>   
> my vehemence comes from a distinct dislike for unfounded deformations.
>
> you could have avoided this by presenting:
> a) direct questions to establish the facts (e.g. why was the story not
> published on mailing lists)
> b) your direct opinion on how the event should have been handled
> c) any accusations/denunciations based on facts and evidence (i dont count a
> shit throwing article by a known troll as evidence).
>
> i really dont want to waste any more time on this.
>
>

Disingenuous at best Nicholas.

Tone argument responses are by definition trolling and yes, you've 
wasted more time and bandwidth for everyone than was necessary for your 
trolling.

go away

-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org