Posted on

The Battle of Market Basket

Several people have asked what I think of the Market Basket drama, including the boycotts and empty shelves as employees fight for the reinstatement of recently canned CEO Arthur T. Demoulas. Here’s my answer.

Mood music:

Many people worry about what will become of a supermarket chain that, up to this point, has been the cheapest on the block. If this chain goes bye-bye, a lot of people in financial distress worry they’ll have more trouble putting food on the table.

I’ve never been a fan of Market Basket. I hate the narrow, cluttered aisles and find the quality of their produce and meats substandard. Other supermarkets are way too expensive, especially the likes of Shaws and Whole Foods. We shop at Hannaford, which has decent quality and more reasonable prices than Shaws, in our opinion.

But that’s a personal choice. While Market Basket isn’t my cup of tea, I’m glad it’s around. For one thing, competition is good. For another, I have friends and family who rely on Market Basket’s lower prices, and they are genuinely frightened.

Do I support the workers who are rebelling, trying to get their old CEO his job back? Yes and no.

I certainly respect them and admire them for standing up for what they believe in. There are so few family companies left that invest in employees that it’s hard to disagree when some dedicated employees are willing to stick their necks out to preserve something important.

On the other hand, they are not the owners and, fair or not, the owners can do whatever they see fit, as long as they operate within the law.

The big action items fall to customers.

If you’re a customer and the chain starts to jack up prices and make it harder for you to feed your family, you can speak with your dollars. In this case, if they change their ways, don’t give them your money.

If enough people act, someone will leap in to fill the void and offer the cheaper option customers don’t feel they’re getting from Market Basket any longer.

I hope it doesn’t come to that and that sanity prevails.

To those fighting the good fight, I wish you the best of luck.

market basket store in ashland

Posted on

So You Wanna Boycott RSA Conference 2014

Disclaimer: This is my opinion. I do not speak on behalf of my employer.

Folks in the information security industry are debating whether to boycott RSA Conference 2014 to protest RSA’s reported misdeeds concerning the National Security Agency (NSA). Boycotts can be powerful tools. But they can also lead to trolling or a loss of your own voice.

Mood music:

One of this blog’s missions is to promote more reasonable discussion. I’ve seen how people hurt each other with words in the security industry and elsewhere, and this latest issue is no exception.

It’s a waste of energy.

Some Background

At last count, eight well-known security practitioners announced that they were skipping the upcoming RSA Conference in San Francisco because the conference’s sponsor, security vendor RSA, allegedly pocketed money from the NSA to put a faulty encryption algorithm into one of its products.

The revelation is part of the ongoing fallout of former NSA technical contractor Edward Snowden leaking details of top-secret mass-surveillance programs to the press.

In this debate on whether RSA, and by extension the NSA, did wrong, you’re either a PR-obsessed grandstander or a coward who refuses to take a stand. It just depends on which side of the discussion you fall under. Those who are boycotting the RSA conference have been accused of the former, while those who are still attending are accused of being the latter.

My Two Cents

I’m going to RSA Conference 2014.

Based on all the information out there — and I’ve read quite a bit of it — I’m inclined to believe RSA took money from NSA to allow a flaw into its technology.

I agree that this shouldn’t come as a surprise because the NSA was, after all, created for those sorts of activities. That doesn’t mean there’s no cause for anger.

RSA customers rely on the company’s products to keep proprietary information safe from sinister hands. Taking money from a government agency to make spying easier is not OK. The argument that spying on American citizens is necessary to uncover terrorist plots is rubbish. It’s the same fear-based thinking after 9-11 that led to the PATRIOT Act. That’s my opinion. To those who disagree, I mean no disrespect. Good people can disagree.

Having said all that, you would think I’d be among the boycotters. I share their anger and respect their right to protest as they see fit, as long as no one is harmed in the process. But I’m not boycotting for a few reasons:

  • I’ve never gone to RSA Conference to support RSA the company. I go to network with peers and get a better sense of what the latest security trends are.
  • I can’t do my job from the sidelines. I have to be where the action is.
  • If you’re angry with RSA, isn’t it better to attend the conference and speak your mind? It’s a more powerful approach than staying home.

I don’t claim to have all the answers. I don’t claim moral superiority. That’s simply where I stand.

On Twitter the other night, Akamai CSO Andy Ellis — my friend and boss — said, “Whether or not one agrees with the RSAC boycott, we can celebrate [the boycotters’] freedom to express anger and disappointment. We need more of that.”

Furthermore, he said, we should be able to be angry without feeling the need to ostracize those who aren’t expressing anger, and vice versa.

He’s right.

It’s OK to rage, and it’s OK to boycott. Troll if you must. That’s your right, my friends. I’m going to follow my conscience and strive for civility.

RSA SecurID