[Owasp-board] Apology from Jim Manico

Jim Manico jim.manico at owasp.org
Fri Jan 10 04:39:28 UTC 2014

> But just like "White Hat Hacker" Chris Gatford i.e.
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/technology/queensland-police-file-still-open-on-smh-hack-story/story-e6frgakx-1226322314514,
> you to have resorted to destroying and fabricating the very evidence
> against you.

You ASKED me to delete it right away, so I deleted it. In fact I could
prove to you and let you listen to the recording - but wait! I can't
because you asked me to delete it and I did. :)

And I already denied your request for an apology.

- Jim

> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Jim Manico <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>> I wanted to do Skype to save myself the cost of a long distance
>> international phone call. Again, the moment you expressed concern I
>> stopped the software and deleted the file. I did not at all threaten
>> you ever with the recording.
> Your agenda is nothing more than to generate sales for WhiteHat
> Security while leveraging your position on the OWASP Board to attack
> its competitors, such as Aspect Security i.e.
> http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/2013-March/011680.html
> I suspect that both TC and John from WhiteHat still want to close that
> sale with Big Tobacco (ironic that an "ethical" organisation like
> Whitehat would want to sell to Big Tobacco)  so your mobile phone bill
> would have been absorbed by WhiteHat.
> In the past I have called you on my mobile and absorbed the cost i.e.
> around $250 USD.
>> But when you said your intention was to harm and disrupt OWASP it was
>> very upsetting. My job as a board member tasks me with protecting the
>> organization from those who want to cause intentional harm.
> While I could have denied your hurtful claim since you don't have any
> supporting evidence (in terms of the Skype recording), I have openly
> admitted to making the statement and provided the context too which
> further diminishes your claim that I intend to damage OWASP.
> I find this odd that you would claim that I want to damage an
> organisation that I am associated with too.
> Jim, based on your actions during the OWASP Top Ten Board Call it
> fairly clear that you damage OWASP in a much greater capacity with
> your lack of social awareness than me i.e.:
> 1. Your resolution to fork the OWASP Top Ten, which dilutes the Top
> Ten brand and;
> 2. Your empty threat to resign from the OWASP Board as your "family"
> works for the IRS.
> 3. Your attempt to employ Andrew van der Stock who John at WhiteHat
> says tends to overshare his personal problems and also destroyed OWASP
> in Australia but falsely accusing RUXCON to be behind the Google
> Hacking inquiry (For the record RUXCON weren't and I knew this from
> the onset).
> I look forward to receiving your apology on both OWASP and WhiteHat
> Security letterhead (as two separate printed letters).  Can you please
> have Jeremiah Grossman sign the letter from WhiteHat Security too?

More information about the Owasp-board mailing list