Next meet: first Friday of the month
 _______   ______  _______  _______     _        _______  _        ______   _______  _       
/ ___   ) / ____ \(  __   )(  __   )   ( \      (  ___  )( (    /|(  __  \ (  ___  )( (    /|
\/   )  |( (    \/| (  )  || (  )  |   | (      | (   ) ||  \  ( || (  \  )| (   ) ||  \  ( |
    /   )| (____  | | /   || | /   |   | |      | |   | ||   \ | || |   ) || |   | ||   \ | |
  _/   / |  ___ \ | (/ /) || (/ /) |   | |      | |   | || (\ \) || |   | || |   | || (\ \) |
 /   _/  | (   ) )|   / | ||   / | |   | |      | |   | || | \   || |   ) || |   | || | \   |
(   (__/\( (___) )|  (__) ||  (__) | _ | (____/\| (___) || )  \  || (__/  )| (___) || )  \  |
\_______/ \_____/ (_______)(_______)(_)(_______/(_______)|/    )_)(______/ (_______)|/    )_)

London 2600: Our thoughts on infosec and anonymity

Posted by anon on 17th May 2017

In the wake of the recent highly publicised WanaDecryptor infections, a number of news outlets have seen fit to reveal the intentionally concealed identity of @MalwareTechBlog for his part in halting the spread of the malware.

We believe that this is dangerous, both for MalwareTech himself, who routinely analyses and exposes the malware of organised criminals, and for the chilling effect this irresponsible reporting has on security research in general.

Many of us know each other by only the names we choose for ourselves online. As a group, we've long understood that this anonymity promotes free expression, and the free exchange of information and ideas. We believe that this choice should be available to everyone who needs or wants it, and so we condemn this, as we condemn all unjustifiable deanonymisation.

Signed (attendees)

Signed (non-attendees)

Obligatory disclaimer

This post represents only the views of those listed in no particular order above. If you wish to be listed above, the first test is knowing who to ask!