Someone Explain This Cartoon
Zeek in Action Videos
This is a quick note to point blog readers to my Zeek in Action YouTube video series for the Zeek network security monitoring project . Each video addresses a topic that I think might be of interest to people trying to understand their network using Zeek and adjacent tools and approaches, like Suricata, Wireshark, and so on. I am especially pleased with Video 6 on monitoring wireless networks . It took me several weeks to research material for this video. I had to buy new hardware and experiment with a Linux distro that I had not used before -- Parrot . Please like and subscribe, and let me know if there is a topic you think might make a good video.
Comments
My thoughts...some folks (you and Bruce) take what you know and put it in a book. Mike took a different route...which I won't recount.
It's Securiteam, so you can't give the author any credit for a sophisticated analysis of Applied Cryptography (which is an evil book). My read is that he's saying something nice about the two books; specifically, that they are in the top tier of security books. I agree with half the sentiment.
However, compare the amount of new information conveyed by books to what's released at a conference!
I like this comic. Bit of a Rorshach blot, isn't it?
Looking at the cartoon it appears "Mike" is signing a paper (with "Black Hat") on the top.
He doesn't look happy either.
The 2005 conference proceedings for Black Hat was the same red color. It looks to me like Lynn is simply autographing the conference program (which in itself was controversial because Lynn's page were physically cut out by Cisco minions as the show opened). I think a few unmolested 2005 programs did manage to sneak out, hence the desire for an autographed copy.
Hmm, your answer might make sense. If you're right, though, I don't understand why the cartoonist would take a shot at Bruce. Is the cartoonist saying no one wants an autographed copy of Applied Cryptography?
what do you think it says about the security community that heaps such attention on lynn? and isn't it implying that lynn has become part of security's pop-culture?
Seriously, I believe Pete and Kurts interpretation are the closest and get the “Closest to the Pin” trophies. Read the post that is associated with the cartoon.
I think it’s parody. Guys like Schneier and you are writing books, and are invited to the “party”. Mike Lynn, who was big news last year, is sulking as he forges a signature to get in. I don't think he’s poking fun at any of the 3 individuals involved, but rather at Ellen Messmer, who wrote a factually inaccurate article at http://www.networkworld.com/news/2006/080306-lynn-cisco-black-hat.html. I believe he is signing the "Black Hat Card" since most people would just scratch their heads at the "Black Hat Cisco Afterparty Card".
At least that’s my take on it…
Why not, with the ambiguity of the content, that interpretation makes as much sense as any...
I will say this much, despite the lack of artistic or script writing talent, this guy is a marketing genius. Look at the discussion it has generated. I wonder how many hits you've sent this guy’s way? Perhaps that the purpose of the article...
That being said, the cartoon's activity in the last frame is a bit ambiguous, so I could be wrong...
Special of the day for Tuesday: Cisco Duck with Condolezza Rice. Price: $6.66, plus tax. Whine costs extra.
:-)
Then DO it. Just keep in mind that it's only a frelling cartoon.
I suppose it's just TOO easy to write the author and ask what his intended meaning is. Na, that is too hard.
Try finding an email address for Brian Shearer.
If you don't like this thread, why are you reading it?
???
That took every bit of 3 seconds.
I could have searched for "gravyboy memory leak" and found his MySpace page, which mentions his work for the SecuriTeam cartoon. I avoid MySpace like the plague though.
I could have also waited for him to simply reply to the comment posted to the cartoon on 7 Aug 06, to which he never responded.
We'll see if Brian replies now.
I'm not taking this as seriously as some anonymous posters seem to be.
Um..okay, let me tackle some of your comments. First of all, I didn't write this strip, it was a collaboration between myself as a work-for-hire artist and those at securiteam. Some strips I have more input in the writing stage...this wasn't one of them as I do not follow these type of issues.
ANONYMOUS SAID: "The 2005 conference proceedings for Black Hat was the same red color. It looks to me like Lynn is simply autographing the conference program (which in itself was controversial because Lynn's page were physically cut out by Cisco minions as the show opened). I think a few unmolested 2005 programs did manage to sneak out, hence the desire for an autographed copy."
Yes, this is what was explained to me in the script. In retrospect, I should have shown the first two panels with the authors signing their books too. This might have cut down on the ambiguity.
JOHN WARD SAID: "I will say this much, despite the lack of artistic or script writing talent..."
Ouch.
this guy is a marketing genius."
Not so much.
"I wonder how many hits you've sent this guy’s way?"
Actually, not that many. But feel free.
THOMAS PTACEK SAID: "you can't give the author any credit for a sophisticated analysis of Applied Cryptography"
If your referring to to the person who actually wrote it, I can't tell you one way or the other...because I'm not qualified to do a sophisticated analysis of people qualified to do a sophisticated analysis of Applied Cryptography.
RICHARD SAID: "I avoid MySpace like the plague though."
I did as long as I could...but I have things to shamlessly self-promote...things that aren't nearly as attention grabbing, apparently, as Memory Leak # 12 :)
"I could have also waited for him to simply reply to the comment posted to the cartoon on 7 Aug 06, to which he never responded."
Sorry I forget to check those comments. I hope I have more than made up for that here.
Well, it was fun. I hope I made things a little clearer.