Ethical Hacking Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package. | Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. |

| Subject: | RE: [Full-disclosure] MSIE (mshtml.dll) OBJECT tag vulnerability |
|---|---|
| Date: | Thu, 27 Apr 2006 22:44:33 +0200 (CEST) |
On Thu, 27 Apr 2006, Tim Bilbro wrote:
There is no question that vendors, particulary Microsoft, have a history of neglect in this area, and folks have a right to be angry with them.
I'm not angry with Microsoft. It's just a company, and not a particularly evil one. I simply believe that there is no longer a reason to be nice to MSRC and go to the extremes to protect Microsoft's customers. Although I'm willing to cooperate with friendly vendors in order to minimize eventual damage (you both should do some background research, really), it is ultimately that vendor's duty to care for their customers, and take responsibility for own mistakes. If customers are repeatedly burned by vendor's negligent coding practices, the vendor ought to be pressured into making security a priority, and collaborating with the infosec community to ENCOURAGE responsible disclosure, not DEMAND it and issue reprimands to those who disobey them. It is not my job to withold information on product flaws at all costs, or to repeatedly bug the vendor for 3-6 months or more to fix a problem. A bonus fact: I'm not planting bugs in their software, either. Why didn't I even try, you say? Past experiences of numerous researchers aside, consider this: Microsoft takes 3-6 months to fix critical but non-public vulnerabilities in their flagship software (some of these flaws must've been independently discovered by the rogues, hence putting customers at great risk, or at best taking chances). This is not a reasonable timeframe, compared to industry averages. Yet, they only take 2-4 weeks to fix publicly disclosed bugs - thus making software safer, sooner.
Unfortunately, full disclosure doesn't hurt them as much as it hurts the information security community as a whole.
You're making an argument for no disclosure and no accountability... ...by saying that it sucks for infosec workers to have to do some actual work, rush workarounds, write IDS signatures - based not on guesses, but on useful information... ...and you're making this argument On a full disclosure mailing list. Bravo. Now if you excuse me... I feel as if I'm being trolled. Have you guys considered pursuing a Usenet career? /mz _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Full-disclosure] Internet Explorer User Interface Races, Redeux, n3td3v |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Full-disclosure] MSIE (mshtml.dll) OBJECT tag vulnerability, meta security |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: [Full-disclosure] MSIE (mshtml.dll) OBJECT tag vulnerability, Tim Bilbro |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Full-disclosure] MSIE (mshtml.dll) OBJECT tag vulnerability, Brian Eaton |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |