Can qny network security folks out there shed some light on this?
That should be ‘any’. :rolleyes:
Could you believe - both?
GRC provides useful services - it’s not all a crock of stuff. On the other hand, GRCsucks has some valid complaints about some of the details and methods that GRC uses.
IMHO, If you look through the details of the criticisms on GRCsucks, while valid, they are quite nit-picky.
Generally, some in the security community feel Steve Gibson should not hold himself out as some security expert. And perhaps he shouldn’t, but he is clearly a clever business man.
Nothing on the GRCsucks site suggests that the GRC site is full of stuff, just that some of the details aren’t technically accurate, and some of the hyperbole is over the top.
This isn’t a great analogy, but one that comes to my head right now. Think of Budweiser and Budweisersucks (hypothetical). Why real beer connoisseur would have a valid point that Budweiser sucks, it still the best selling beer (at least in the US), and that should say something as well.
Does that (lack of an) answer help?
It does.
I’ve always liked Steve’s site and was starting to worry I was falling into some Fundy Net Security cult after reading GRCSucks.com. 
Thanks. The ‘grain of salt’ tactic will work fine.
I think there is no way to answer this as a General Question but rather as IMHO. If you are ask about a very specific issue then we can go into that issue but other than that both sides have valid points.
Good point.
Seeing as that I always looked at GRC as an authority in this matter, I guess my real question should have been:
“Is the network security info that Steve Gibson of GRC gives out true/accurate or just a load of bull? Should I take him seriously now that GRCSucks has come to bat, or should I second guess his advice?”