What started as a question on twitter, turned into a poll and twitter discussion, has begun to evolve into something interesting: The “ Rapid Peer Review ”.
I’ve had quite a few DMs and emails with several people over the past week on peer reviews in the DFIR world to discuss this topic.
In short, academic reviews take too long to publish and are of limited practical value for practitioners. We need a better system.
During these discussions, Jessica Hyde coined the “RAPID PEER REVIEW” name, so I’m sticking with that.
Since this idea is evolving, here are some of the ideas being discussed, all subject to change:
* Process should take 30 days or less to be considered Peer-reviewed or rejected
* Previously peer-reviewed work (as seen in a published journal) would be ineligible
* Previously written work that has been cited or referenced may be judged as already