John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> That depends on whether or not more information is being provided to
> affected organizations, as claimed. Thus far there hasn't been any
> suggestion that it hasn't, so I think this criticism is, at the very
> least. premature. ;) The recent massive Intel security patch also
> lends credibility to the claims.

Security researchers routinely inform "affected organizations" well in
advance and delay the splashy public presentations until there's
something available in the way of a fix. Going public before that
usually only occurs after the exploit has already appeared in the wild
or after vendors have been dragging their feet on the problem for a long
time.

No informed person is denying that there could be serious security holes
in wireless device drivers. The validity of this particular claim will
be sorted out in time. It's not so much the content of the announcement
as its timing, that bizarre demonstration, and Ellch's and Maynor's
extracurricular statements that have raised questions about their
motives and credibility.