The director in question wrote to me on 3 May, presumably having obtained my email address from my registration details on the company's website; which I supplied in order to download a copy of the company's recent study on distributed denial of service attacks.
This is rare, because though I have registered at dozens of websites in order to download studies and the like, those who work there understand that a journalist is doing so only to obtain material for a report.
The director appeared to be unaware of the reason why I had registered because he offered to send me the same report which I had already obtained.
There are a number of business email addresses in the email chain.
Neustar's DDoS study was questionable; iTWire did not report on the contents as the sample used seemed to be very small for the kinds of conclusions drawn, and regions covered.
Only 1010 people were interviewed for this 52-page report and they only came from the storied ranks – the so-called c-suite.
Exactly how Neustar came to the conclusions it had for this report was thus questionable. More so, when this was for three massive geographical regions; North America, Europe and the Asia-Pacific.
The director's email faux pas raises further questions about Neustar.
The fact that someone working for an IT analytics company reveals information like this to others through email does not speak very highly of Neustar.
The company should thank its stars that iTWire has chosen not to reveal the information that has been sent to us.