Why there is no vested interest in security? The users of computers on the internet really hate dealing with people and love dealing with their computer. So finding a vested group of abused and battered users to rally behind the battle flag and charge is like trying to mate two porcupines with reproductive systems designed by Rube Goldberg. Even if it could be done it wouldn’t be pretty or very effective. The plain old truth is we need a Canada a place where it is OK to delay success and claim victory somewhere south of the border as an overnight wonder. I suggest massive attacks might be launched on the society of abused porcupines by groups of hacker leveling everything they have. The victory is all but won by the hackers, scam artist, and other methods used to separate porcupines from their love one. This method will allow a repository of information to be developed that the porcupines will not share with others and when the world is leveled by the ultimate threat the secret army of Doctor Zin and his take out specialist the only thing standing between destruction of the free world and the Evil Army of Dr. Zin will be porcupines who could care less what happens to anyone. The secret weapon of the porcupine is ignoring everything. Many claim to be porcupines but are really wolves in porcupine clothing. I suggest testing be conducted to determine the nature of the porcupine and embed an insurgent force within the ranks of the porcupines altering the nature of the beast so that when Zin arrives and we all grab our ankles we have porcupines to rest our head on.

> But Microsoft also moved backwards one step IMO by going for the
> "shared database of phishing alerts" idea pioneered by Netcraft.
> Computer scientists and security gurus are still scratching their heads
> over how that is ever going to work, given that it never worked the
> other several hundred times we tried it.

Hasn't stopped google from trying it either :)

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/8760