Hacker News Reader

Comment by defcontalks | Hacker News Reader

During the talk they told us why they called it meat pistol.. it's an anagram for metasploit. Meat Pistol made sense because it shoots out malware implants.

Also why pull out in the last 30 mins? And why fire them? No warnings ? Mistakes happen, you don't fire a director for something like that. The PR process is to make sure the company's image looks good, who better knows the Defcon audience? Hackers or PR people who don't understand the framework?

There is really no other way to see it than Salesforce fucked up.

View on HN

> During the talk they told us why they called it meat pistol.. it's an anagram for metasploit. Meat Pistol made sense because it shoots out malware implants.

I wonder why they didn't pick Metapistol.

There's a lot of things you can wonder, but they're not all worth mentioning.

What are you more likely to remember a week from now: Meatpistol or Metapistol? Reminds me of the resistor color code mnemonic, something I memorized for life the first time I heard it.

Ahh! Violet! I miss her.

Leave her alone, she's just 7.

>During the talk they told us why they called it meat pistol.. it's an anagram for metasploit. Meat Pistol made sense because it shoots out malware implants.

OK, try getting a PR department to sign off on that.

The whole point is that they already knew about it before hand(It being called meatpistol, hence the previous meeting) so firing them 30 mins prior is bullshit, hence the drama.

And they presented it at Hushcon before with approval so what's the problem with that?

And this is what I'm saying is unlikely, because, try getting a PR department to sign off on that.

> And they presented it at Hushcon before with approval so what's the problem with that?

Why do you think they got approval at Hushcon?

Because Salesforce did nothing after hushcon? Which means it would have been approved.. say if it wasn't approved, isn't that a failure on SF's part because the employees would think it's fine.

I don't see why you keep defending Salesforce, they did mess up even if say the employees did not go through the approval process. You don't fire People over that, especially if previous talks are public on the same subject. Especially not at Defcon. That's why SF is in the wrong.

There's a lot of assumptions in this interpretation of events. It's entirely possible that warnings were issued after hushcon and that's why action was so severe this time around. It's also possible that no warnings were ever issued and there is blame for overreacting due to the management. Either way, it seems like there's plenty of information available for interpretation but not conclusion in this scenario.

Not all companies are like that. I developed an internal admin tool and called it RETARD (it's an acronym).

I'm glad I don't work at a company where that's an acceptable project name.

One dictionary I have at hand details five definitions of the word retard.

Why do we have to feel obliged to take offense at the whole word due to one slang definition.

Why should MEATPISTOL be a problem?

retard

1. to make slow; delay the development or progress of (an action, process, etc.); hinder or impede. verb (used without object)

2. to be delayed.

noun

3. a slowing down, diminution, or hindrance, as in a machine.

4. Slang: Disparaging and Offensive. a contemptuous term used to refer to a person who is cognitively impaired.

a person who is stupid, obtuse, or ineffective in some way: a hopeless social retard.

5. Automotive, Machinery. an adjustment made in the setting of the distributor of an internal-combustion engine so that the spark for ignition in each cylinder is generated later in the cycle.

I'm not offended and don't take issues with the use of retard in a non-slang context, but for the naming of a project I think it's inappropriate to use a word that could bring back hurtful memories of harassment that people have potentially endured.

Would you name a project the same as your username?

That's a historical accident. My name in RuneScape when I played as a kid had football in it and I shortened it to foota.

Then can we at least postpone the renaming until someone actually complains about it first-hand, rather than "just in case" and on someone else's behalf?

Don't get anywhere near fire retardants...

Seriously, there is a balance to be had. People who went through traumatic events are often offered therapy precisely because you can't reasonably expect the entire world to guess and remove every single thing that can trigger someone's hurtful memories.

Am I the only one who immediately thinks of the verb form of "retard" when it's presented with absolutely no context?

I'm so used to hearing without any conceit that antibacterial mouthwashes can retard bacterial growth.

I'm glad we haven't been forced to stop using ritardando in music settings yet.

You think like Airbus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sikGj2flLB8

To me the word "retard" immediately brings to mind fire retardants. Offense is in the eye of the person who takes offense...

I'm glad I don't work at a company where the thought police will come down on you if you don't take yourself too seriously.

Still okay if there were any co-workers who found it offensive? Perhaps because it hits home for them?

"Thought Police" is alt-right for "Nazi"

Didn't you get the memo? Anyone who doesn't immediately and fully agree with your position is a "nazi", regardless of what that position is.

"Also why pull out in the last 30 mins?"

Actively developing and planning to release a malware creation tool? That sounds like developing and releasing cyber weaponry. We've got export laws regarding that IIRC.

Yea. EAR and ITA explicitly cover this, in fact.

Which part, specifically? The only restriction on the EAR I see that applies is that on encryption, and Part 742.15(b) provides an explicit exception for software where the source is publicly available. That's why, for example, non-US citizens must request a special license to download the paid Metasploit version but can download the open source version freely[1].

[1] https://community.rapid7.com/community/infosec/blog/2015/06/...

Journal of National Security Law and Policy, Vol. 8, No. 2, 2015. Quite the argument made there that EAR and ITA do indeed deal with the making and distribution of cyber weaponry.

Thanks for the reference!

I think that article only emphasises that it is not subject to those regulations. Quote:

We conclude that, at a technical level, the distinction between weaponry and non-weapon malicious software lies in the payload component of the tool, which must be capable of creating destructive digital or physical effects

Meatpistol is only a framework, therefore there's no payload component.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com