OK, I am going to come out of my self-imposed Mr. Nice Guy persona and return to the gruff NY'er. What has put me in this state you ask? It is all the radioactive fall out from the Top 59 list or as I now call it, "the fighting 59". The latest drama comes from Mark Curphey over at Security Buddha. He has dropped his feeds from the Security Bloggers Network due to a " low signal to noise ratio and some of the other members were not folks I want to be associated with". Somehow this situation came to a head with the fighting 59 list. First of all, so that we are all clear, as the administrator for the SBN, to paraphrase Bill Clinton, the SBN never had sex with that list. It had nothing to do with the list and I was never contacted by those people. So blaming the SBN in anyway for the list or even associating it with the list is not necessarily accurate.
Now lets get down to business, my good friend Michael Farnum, who I have a tremendous amount of respect and admiration for, seems to have been driven to some self-doubt around this whole thing and writes about "incest in the security blogosphere". Michael, while I understand what you are saying, I think you have some fundamental mistakes here. Frankly, Mark I think you have too. The cardinal mistake you are both guilty of has nothing to do with security and who is most influential, but rather why people blog. Fighting over whether the list is accurate, is the list full of crap or who should be on the list, is just frigging asinine. I played along this afternoon with my own Top 10 list because Thomas asked me to contribute some names. But frankly those are my names and I went out of my way to load it up with business people who some of the tech types might find down right repulsive. Mark, the people you mention who were missing from the fighting 59 are I am sure worthy of inclusion on your list. But hey there tiger, that is your list, not my list, not Farnum's list and not the ITSecurity.com list. Frankly, Mark, Michael, Thomas, Hoff, Richard from Tao, Amrit (who I think actually has the right attitude on this one) and the rest of you, as regards the ITSecurity list, it is their god darn list and they can do whatever they want with it and put whoever they want on it. You don't want to be on it, tell them to take your name off, but don't stamp your feed and hold your breath about what a joke it is. Cause here is a newsflash for you all - the joke is on you! I don't know about the rest of you, but the fighting 59 has brought over a thousand hits to my site since it was published. If the list is really full of beans, people will see through it. Don't discount the common sense of the public. I think many of us who blog have breathed too much of our own exhaust and think that somehow we are smarter than some of the public at large who read this stuff. Not the case. To me this is no better than a magazine giving a best buy award to a product that I know sucks and is ripping off Ron Gula's NASL scripts. Do I think it is fair? Hell no, but it is what it is. It is their magazine and they can write what they want. Same thing with the fighting 59 list. You don't like it, go make your own. If you are such a bigshot, see how many hits you get with it.
That is a fundamental thing about blogging. Guys you have a forum to write and say what you want. You can be on even ground with securityit.com, the same way I get a chance to go toe-to-toe with Richard Stiennon, Mike Rothman, Amrit, Ross Brown and the rest. You want to rail against the ITsecurity guys, go ahead. Thomas has it right, he spoke his mind. The rest of you bandwagon jumpers, get an original thought and do something about it or just shut up. The whining about who I would put on my list is baby crap already that is beneath most of you. You have your own blog, get to it. There are people who don't have blogs and somehow you think they have gotten a raw deal as influencers because they don't blog, too fucking bad (now you did it, made me curse again, I must be really mad). No one stops them from blogging. Mark and Michael, you think some people have written about PCI who don't know their ass from their elbow, go ahead and call them out on it, but stop threatening to do it. In the words of Jack Nicholson as Randall McMurphy, "which one of you nuts has any guts". Hey, I have done it time and time again. Sometimes I am right and sometimes I take my lumps, but I do it, I don't threaten to do it. Ultimately as I wrote on Marks blog in my comments, the market will decide who they want to listen to, who they value and who influences them. One thing that pisses me off is the elitist, I know better than the rest of you attitude that some have. To me it is much more offending then the legend in your own mind stuff. In the real world we count success not by how many cool vulnerabilities you found or how "cool" your friends think you are. In the real world the scoreboard is kept in dollars and cents. When I see whining about people who have big budgets and have never got their hands dirty with security not being "worthy". I want to say, dude wake up and smell the coffee. You think it is easy building a company and getting people to buy your product. Go ask people who have done it, then come tell me about what a PCI expert you are.
Next, bloggers have egos. If you didn't like to hear yourself talk, you wouldn't blog. Blogging in security is no bigger than it is in any other industry Michael. In fact compared to some others, it is tiny. Of the 65 sites on the SBN we have a combined circulation of about 8000. To put it in perspective, Brad Feld's VC bloggers network with 74 sites has a combined subscriber base of 200,000! We are still a tiny cottage industry here and according to all of the numbers I have seen it is only just beginning. We are blogging for all of our own reasons, but Michael you admit it and Mark deep down you will to, everyone wants to be recognized for contributing something worthwhile. Frankly, when I started blogging, most everyone laughed at me, including my wife, my friends and co-workers. Martin McKeay and Brad Feld were the only people who encouraged me. Today, though I love to watch my stats and am amazed that people find reason to read what I write, I still write mostly to satisfy myself and my own ego. If I want to use my blog to boost my ego and make me feel like a legend in my own mind, that is my god given right to do so, so go find another hydrant to piss on.
Feeding off of what other people write and putting your own 2 cents in is what blogging is all about. I actually look back at my posts and probably 40 to 50% or more are commenting on other articles. That boys is what blogging is all about. It is your own channel where you can say what you want on anything you want. There is no law that you have to be original on your blog. There is also no law that you have to read anyones blog. If too many that you don't like to read are aggregated like it apparently was for Mark with the SBN, he is free to not read the feed. He could have unsubscribed from the feed and left his sites in, but again that is his right and prerogative to pull them off, it is his blog (and I am still subscribed to them BTW). Just like it is ItSecurity.com's list to put on who they want. To each his own and that is what makes the world an interesting place.
And now back to our regularly scheduled program. Mr. Shimel, Nurse Ratched is calling, time for your medicine.