Steady on there. The author has clearly done a lot of work on this and while your points are valid, that this method of attack isn't new nor practical, he has still learned a very genuine potential vector for attack. Thus it deserves a mature discussion since there will certainly be others who might learn from the author's research.
I'm all for constructive criticisms, but calling his article "dumb" is just unnecessary language. It doesn't contribute anything and yet could discourage authors from publishing future work.
Steady on there. The author has clearly done a lot of work on this and while your points are valid, that this method of attack isn't new nor practical, he has still learned a very genuine potential vector for attack. Thus it deserves a mature discussion since there will certainly be others who might learn from the author's research.
I'm all for constructive criticisms, but calling his article "dumb" is just unnecessary language. It doesn't contribute anything and yet could discourage authors from publishing future work.