The two researchers, David Maynor and Jon Ellch, who allege to have documented flaws in Apple's Wi-Fi security no longer speaking at Toorcon: The description is still up, but Securiosis notes that SecureWorks has released a statement that the firm, Maynor's employer, is working with the CERT Coordination Center and Apple. Neither firm will release more statements until CERT and the two firms agree, SecureWorks states. (Ellch ("Johnny Cache") doesn't work for SecureWorks, but has deferred to them because of his partner in research. I have been told that Ellch recently completed graduate school and took a job with another firm, although his Web page reveals little.) Update: Ellch told News.com that he wouldn't deliver the talk without Maynor, and also confirmed with Apple that it is working with SecureWorks. Later update (see below): Ellch gives a rant at Toorcon.
I won't rehash the entire issue here, but Maynor and Ellch have been prevented from actually speaking about this issue in a direct manner since they spoke to Washington Post online Security Fix columnist Brian Krebs. As a result, most information is secondhand, incomplete, incoherent, or off the record. I have piles of information received from many sources that I can not share in any fashion.
Where it stands now is that SecureWorks can effectively prevent the full disclosure of information that would either reclaim Maynor and Ellch's reputation, or demonstrate that Maynor and Ellch provided precisely what Apple has previously at length said that they did not. (See George Ou's publication of a very on-point response from Apple on the specifics of what Maynor and Ellch and SecureWorks provided.)
What's left at stake now with Apple having released patches that apparently include anything that Maynor and Ellch allege that they discovered is the reputation of those two individuals.
Saturday update: News.com reports that Ellch got up on stage and read a statement. (eWeek reproduces the rant here.) For some reason, Ellch and the reporters covering this are fixated on the "Mac community," as if that's a monolithic entity. On SecureWorks, Apple, and CERT working together, Ellch is quoted stating: "That's funny...I thought there was no bug, and I thought SecureWorks provided no useful information to Apple...If SecureWorks provided them with virtually nothing useful, then what...could they have to coordinate with CERT?"
News.com writes, "The two researchers had put pressure [sic] Apple by saying they would do a live presentation at ToorCon, Ellch said." That's a paraphrase, and I don't see this precise text in his reproduced rant, so I don't know if Ellch said words that match the rephrasing. However, "put pressure [on] Apple" could be better stated as, "violated the basic tenets of security reporting in which companies or projects are given advance word of flaws in their products and given reasonable amounts of time to respond and release patches." Just by the way.
Ellch also noted, "A few weeks later, one week before ToorCon, they patch it, and say we had nothing to do with it," News.com reports. Of course, "it" isn't just out of context in this quote, but lacks context in the sense that Maynor and Ellch have apparently not been allowed to release the documentation that would prove Ellch's point. There is no way except by taking Maynor and Ellch on faith to accept Ellch's assertion.
Some folks following this issue believe that such documentation doesn't exist, or that, if release, it would prove Apple's contention. In any of those three cases (pro, con, or non-existent), SecureWorks is the linchpin here. Ellch wrote in his rant, "One day before [our ToorCon] talk, SecureWorks and Apple get together and manage to stop Dave from coming." Apple isn't Maynor's employer; this is called displacement.
The News.com reporter summarizes, "While some in the Mac community see the cancellation of Saturday's talk as prove that Maynor and Ellch are frauds..." Yes, that would be Artie MacStrawman. Damn that hayseed!