zlacker

[parent] [thread] 4 comments
1. ErikAu+(OP)[view] [source] 2018-09-28 19:05:23
Do you have a source for this, "throwaway"?
replies(2): >>smbull+M >>throwa+U7
2. smbull+M[view] [source] 2018-09-28 19:11:49
>>ErikAu+(OP)
No need for the anti-anonymity here. Politely asking for a source is fine.
replies(1): >>uabstr+l3
◧◩
3. uabstr+l3[view] [source] [discussion] 2018-09-28 19:29:42
>>smbull+M
Eh. The irony of an anonymous person defending a company which forbids anonymity is not lost on me :)
4. throwa+U7[view] [source] 2018-09-28 20:06:34
>>ErikAu+(OP)
With regards to the implication: this isn't a throwaway account, it's just ironically named. Take a look at my comment history; I'm not affiliated with Facebook in any official capacity, but I do know security engineers who work there and I've been to Facebook offices.

A true statement is that Facebook's security teams have been shifted around in several reorgs. A false statement is that Facebook has dissolved its security teams. The latter is a mischaracterization of the former, because while some security staff have left Facebook for a variety of reasons, the company is not deliberately reducing its security staff nor encouraging their departure. It still employs a huge number of engineers specializing in every major domain of information security.

If you'd like evidence that Facebook is expanding its security presence, you can take a look at its careers portal. It's aggressively hiring security staff in satellite offices that previously weren't focus areas for security engineering.

In my opinion, Alex Stamos' company memo gives a clearer picture of what's happened in Facebook's security org recently.[1] You should read that in addition to media reports.

______________

1. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/facebook-alex-s...

replies(1): >>ErikAu+p68
◧◩
5. ErikAu+p68[view] [source] [discussion] 2018-10-03 02:39:28
>>throwa+U7
Thank you.
[go to top]