I see phrases like “federal crime to obtain unauthrorized access to a computer network” in the same paragraph as damning “intentionally inflamatory language” and I have to throw up my hands. You can’t seriously contend that the discussions of how to avoid the false reset packets or use of these techniques would constitute unauthorized access to a computer network.

Our report is accurate. The packets are injected against the will of the users, and with a source address that is false and misleading. I don’t see it as inaccurate to describe that source address, and thus those packets as forged. When you identify yourself in writing as somebody else who has not authorized you to do so, that sounds like forgery to me.

I am not concerned about your “exposure” of my interests. They are not in any way hidden. Almost everybody who has been on the net as long as we have knows that debates which descend to the level of discussing the other person’s motives quickly become pointless, heated and entirely disinteresting to other parties. As such, please take further discussion that is not about the actual issues rather than personalities to your own blog.