A hardware security researcher's inability to perform Gartner-correct market research is not relevant to his/her ability to decap, image, and analyze silicon, and thus not at all relevant to me. Wow do I ever not care about this particular gotcha.
Is that a "no, I cannot provide any reason to take this seriously besides my (arrogant) word and this vague, exaggerated, ugly, poorly coded web page"?
This security lab's tendency to exaggerate the seriousness of the security problem they've identified is exactly what is in question here.
I never evaluated any project by the design of its web page, I evaluated a web page by its design.
I never evaluated any project at all, just asked why anyone should take you or this web page seriously, and you have been nothing but dismissive in response.
Hacker News Protip: If you click tptacek's name, you can see his profile, which will inform you that he's a computer security professional. That's why anyone should take him seriously.
On top of that, he also has a history here of useful and insightful commentary on security issues. That's also why anyone should take him seriously.
The reason he's responding dismissively to you is probably that you keep attacking the OP for irrelevant niggles. The sort of reasoning you're employing here would lead someone who saw a speech by Albert Einstein to dismiss it by saying, "Bah, he can't even be bothered to do his hair well. Why should I think he does his research any better?" Attacking Einstein's hair does not make his ideas any less valid. If you had material objections to the OP, you'd probably get a more congenial response.
3: I will admit, I had read his other responses in this thread, and intentionally chose to provoke a dismissive response by presenting something on the verge of being immaterial. I even apologize to anyone at the Cambridge Security Lab for any disrespect.
I don't apologize for being irreverent towards tptacek and the Cambridge Security Lab. I still think my core point, "This security lab's tendency to exaggerate the seriousness of the security problem they've identified is exactly what is in question here.", was a totally material response to his original comment, "Cambridge Security Lab is not fucking around.". I also think (and intended) that even though I was trying to provoke him, my response was totally congenial and had a material point and therefore acceptable, while he should not have been so dismissive in response, to me and to everyone else.
