Solve real business challenges on Google Cloud and run workloads for free. For Slashdot users: Get $300 in free credits to fully explore Google Cloud. Get started for free today.
halligas writes "You may have noticed that last month McAfeeacquired security firm Foundstone. Not to be outdone, McAfee rival Symantec has gone out a bought up their very own bunch of hackers, @Stake."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
I wonder what effect this will have on the ability of either parent company to provide better security/AV protection. IMO, Symantec has a faster response to secrity threats.
Will these aquisitions reinforce this mode for symantec or result in McAfee getting a bit better?
by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Friday September 17, 2004 @05:21PM (#10280520)
I think the only thing with l0pht is, if they wanted to remain l0pht, they should have kept that aspect outside of work.
I never understood how a 'hacker group' could merge with a legit company. The members of the group maybe, but MERGE a group with a company is alittle odd. In other words, l0pht should still be around, outside of @Stake. But i'm sure that would be a conflict of interest...or something like that.
I reality, l0pht was cool, but there was plenty of other stuff out there and good for them for cashing in. All everyone seems to want to do is call them sellouts because they did something innovative and got paid for it, instead of sitting behind a desk as a sysadmin for the rest of their lives doing jack shit complaining about everyone in their league who went on a limb and took a real chance. Good for the old l0pht crew.
I think hindsignt will be 20/20 for the l0pht guys -- usually with big business comes big politicking. At least as a smaller entity, they were able to do things their way. Things never stay the same when getting acquired by a larger company. Anyone who has had it happen to them, Im sure can attest. In 99% of all buy-out's, things turn for the worst.
That we do. My only solace about the way things were is that I can raise my daughter with the hacker ethic and hopefully she can help the next generation become great. I tend to avoid living in the past too much, but this was one of the few things which defined who I am. I still have a copy of LC1.? somewhere around here. I still hack as part of my job, and I love what I do . . . Yet, I miss the "glory days" of the late 80's and early 90's. My first Modem was a wierd 4800 baud deal and I was stoked when tech got us all the way to 14.4 I spent over $100 for that damn modem and I used it for almost 5-6 years. The late nights on various BBS's and the difficulty of 'financing' the phone bills for some of the longer sessions. Up until 98 Intel had a BBS hosted that I would call every night and lock up my phone line for 6 hours downloading specs. Once the Web took off all the feeling of subterfuge vanished. [/long winded trip down memory lane] -nB
As far as the l0pht, good for them. Being broke all the time sucks. If you can make money and still maintain a level of integrity...i.e. walk the line between the corporate world and the world where people have integrity, and keep both feet on the integrity side, then as far as I'm concerned you're doing pretty well. From what I knew @Stake was doing that (and charging some serious fees...good for them!)
The bad though is @Stake being bought by Smantec. That is *not* a good thing. As I said, @Stake seemed to have some itegrity and Symantec...well they have *some* integrity, but not as much as they probably should. I don't see why @Stake couldn't/shouldn't continue on it's own. I think there's a line where the decision is whether to cash in or to preserve the company, and I think they crossed it. @Stake seemed to be a somewhat unique company and it seems like that is going to be lost in this. I guess we'll see.
Well open-source arena is kind of a different ball-game -- with the l0pht acquisition, you're talking about hacking and security, which is a very sensitive arena nowadays....
I remember working at a "Security" shop (that were recently acquired by Verisign), and at my time there I found numerous holes in software we used in house. Now, I'm all about full-disclosure and such, and so I had prepared a few advisories on these softwares, only to have my manager tell me it would be "bad for everyone" if I had released these, due to the partership they had with these businesses. So needless to say I wasn't going to sacrifice my apartment and food in my mouth for the sake of disclosure. I would've loved to release those advisories, but because of politics I wasnt able to.
You know, I have heard so many conspiracy theories about anti-virus companys. You know, the old capitalist world domination arguments like, "They write half the viruses out there and have the antidote waiting so you have to buy their product."
While I never really jump into those and at the same time never really discount them, the first thing I thought when I read this was, "What an efficient way to write better viruses." I'm not pointing fingers or trying to start rumors. Just sharing a thought . . . to keep you awake at night.
However, @stake has been 'big business' for a long time. I worked there in 2000, and they were just topping the 400-person mark when I left, spread across 2 continents.
They also let a lot of "non-business-compatible" people go; Space Rogue for not toeing the line with the rest of the l0pht guys, Daniel Greer for openly criticizing Microsoft in a paper he published on his own time, etc.
Outcomes ? (Score:5, Interesting)
Will these aquisitions reinforce this mode for symantec or result in McAfee getting a bit better?
Good, maybe they'll hire back Dan Geer... (Score:4, Interesting)
Since they gave him the boot [computerworld.com] while licking Microsoft's arse cheeks...
Re:do you mean shedding a tear because (Score:4, Interesting)
C
l0pht0r (Score:4, Interesting)
I never understood how a 'hacker group' could merge with a legit company. The members of the group maybe, but MERGE a group with a company is alittle odd. In other words, l0pht should still be around, outside of @Stake. But i'm sure that would be a conflict of interest...or something like that.
I reality, l0pht was cool, but there was plenty of other stuff out there and good for them for cashing in. All everyone seems to want to do is call them sellouts because they did something innovative and got paid for it, instead of sitting behind a desk as a sysadmin for the rest of their lives doing jack shit complaining about everyone in their league who went on a limb and took a real chance. Good for the old l0pht crew.
Hmm (Score:2, Interesting)
Quibble (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:do you mean shedding a tear because (Score:3, Interesting)
[/long winded trip down memory lane]
-nB
Good and bad (Score:4, Interesting)
The bad though is @Stake being bought by Smantec. That is *not* a good thing. As I said, @Stake seemed to have some itegrity and Symantec...well they have *some* integrity, but not as much as they probably should. I don't see why @Stake couldn't/shouldn't continue on it's own. I think there's a line where the decision is whether to cash in or to preserve the company, and I think they crossed it. @Stake seemed to be a somewhat unique company and it seems like that is going to be lost in this. I guess we'll see.
Re:Hmm (Score:2, Interesting)
I remember working at a "Security" shop (that were recently acquired by Verisign), and at my time there I found numerous holes in software we used in house. Now, I'm all about full-disclosure and such, and so I had prepared a few advisories on these softwares, only to have my manager tell me it would be "bad for everyone" if I had released these, due to the partership they had with these businesses. So needless to say I wasn't going to sacrifice my apartment and food in my mouth for the sake of disclosure. I would've loved to release those advisories, but because of politics I wasnt able to.
Conspiracy Theorists? (Score:2, Interesting)
While I never really jump into those and at the same time never really discount them, the first thing I thought when I read this was, "What an efficient way to write better viruses." I'm not pointing fingers or trying to start rumors. Just sharing a thought . . . to keep you awake at night.
Re:Hmm (Score:4, Interesting)
They also let a lot of "non-business-compatible" people go; Space Rogue for not toeing the line with the rest of the l0pht guys, Daniel Greer for openly criticizing Microsoft in a paper he published on his own time, etc.