That's not fair. I've talked to Dan Goodin a number of times regarding some pretty complicated stuff, and he's listened carefully, demanded clarification when I was unclear, and didn't cherry-pick a splashy quote or two and then ignore the substance of the interview. Most people I've talked to seem to agree with me that Goodin is one of the better journalists covering security topics.

BADBIOS is a particularly unreasonable thing to hold over his head. Goodin is a journalist, not a security researcher. He depends on researchers as sources for his story (and in that regard, he is unusually well-sourced; possibly second only to Krebs). Security researchers were not unanimous about BADBIOS. Some of them --- Robert Graham jumps to mind --- were happy to entertain the idea that Dragos really did have a mysterious malware infection. It doesn't help that so many researchers are friends of Dragos.

Matthew Green is a radiant cut emerald of a crypto source. He's a professor of cryptography at Johns Hopkins and a former appsec consultant at Avi Rubin's old company. As far as news sources go, he's extraordinarily well-connected to crypto research; much more so than Schneier, who is reverently quoted everywhere without a peep from HN.

I think Green is being a bit unfair to GPG in this piece, and that it's reasonable to take issue with that. I don't think it's reasonable to direct that ire at Goodin.