<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: My First Cool Idea</title>
	<atom:link href="http://danielmiessler.com/blog/my-first-cool-idea/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://danielmiessler.com/blog/my-first-cool-idea</link>
	<description>grep understanding</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 02:15:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://danielmiessler.com/blog/my-first-cool-idea/comment-page-1#comment-86114</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Oct 2007 04:47:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmiessler.com/blogarchive/my-first-cool-idea#comment-86114</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;If every &quot;first&quot; visit became a multiple query interrogation of the servers used to host the sites (versions, redirection testing, etc) before a host made a connection, you&#039;d be wildly unpopular instantly I suspect.  If you think the dig effect is specular today, you&#039;ll have seen nothing yet.  This would essentially bring every new site under attack the first time it was popular.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;If you&#039;re a believer in a score based system, my guess is that only the escrow/trust system scales. Everyone doing it on their own simply doesn&#039;t scale.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If every &#8220;first&#8221; visit became a multiple query interrogation of the servers used to host the sites (versions, redirection testing, etc) before a host made a connection, you&#8217;d be wildly unpopular instantly I suspect.  If you think the dig effect is specular today, you&#8217;ll have seen nothing yet.  This would essentially bring every new site under attack the first time it was popular.</p>

<p>If you&#8217;re a believer in a score based system, my guess is that only the escrow/trust system scales. Everyone doing it on their own simply doesn&#8217;t scale.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://danielmiessler.com/blog/my-first-cool-idea/comment-page-1#comment-249581</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Oct 2007 04:47:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmiessler.com/blogarchive/my-first-cool-idea#comment-249581</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;If every &quot;first&quot; visit became a multiple query interrogation of the servers used to host the sites (versions, redirection testing, etc) before a host made a connection, you&#039;d be wildly unpopular instantly I suspect.  If you think the dig effect is specular today, you&#039;ll have seen nothing yet.  This would essentially bring every new site under attack the first time it was popular.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;If you&#039;re a believer in a score based system, my guess is that only the escrow/trust system scales. Everyone doing it on their own simply doesn&#039;t scale.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If every &#8220;first&#8221; visit became a multiple query interrogation of the servers used to host the sites (versions, redirection testing, etc) before a host made a connection, you&#8217;d be wildly unpopular instantly I suspect.  If you think the dig effect is specular today, you&#8217;ll have seen nothing yet.  This would essentially bring every new site under attack the first time it was popular.</p>

<p>If you&#8217;re a believer in a score based system, my guess is that only the escrow/trust system scales. Everyone doing it on their own simply doesn&#8217;t scale.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carl M</title>
		<link>http://danielmiessler.com/blog/my-first-cool-idea/comment-page-1#comment-86086</link>
		<dc:creator>Carl M</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Oct 2007 01:36:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmiessler.com/blogarchive/my-first-cool-idea#comment-86086</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Well, a couple of things occur to me.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;(1) The site that serves up the ratings better be pretty darn secure.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;(2) It better not be possible for another site to pretend that it is the ratings-serving site.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;(3) If this worked for a while people might get complacent about net security so that when it was finally broken it might be a REAL mess.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;... just thoughts .. (I don&#039;t think that (3) is as serious as (1) and (2).)&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, a couple of things occur to me.</p>

<p>(1) The site that serves up the ratings better be pretty darn secure.</p>

<p>(2) It better not be possible for another site to pretend that it is the ratings-serving site.</p>

<p>(3) If this worked for a while people might get complacent about net security so that when it was finally broken it might be a REAL mess.</p>

<p>&#8230; just thoughts .. (I don&#8217;t think that (3) is as serious as (1) and (2).)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carl M</title>
		<link>http://danielmiessler.com/blog/my-first-cool-idea/comment-page-1#comment-249580</link>
		<dc:creator>Carl M</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Oct 2007 01:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmiessler.com/blogarchive/my-first-cool-idea#comment-249580</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Well, a couple of things occur to me.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;(1) The site that serves up the ratings better be pretty darn secure.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;(2) It better not be possible for another site to pretend that it is the ratings-serving site.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;(3) If this worked for a while people might get complacent about net security so that when it was finally broken it might be a REAL mess.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;... just thoughts .. (I don&#039;t think that (3) is as serious as (1) and (2).)&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, a couple of things occur to me.</p>

<p>(1) The site that serves up the ratings better be pretty darn secure.</p>

<p>(2) It better not be possible for another site to pretend that it is the ratings-serving site.</p>

<p>(3) If this worked for a while people might get complacent about net security so that when it was finally broken it might be a REAL mess.</p>

<p>&#8230; just thoughts .. (I don&#8217;t think that (3) is as serious as (1) and (2).)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

