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] defining 0day |
|---|---|
| Date: | Tue, 25 Sep 2007 23:38:41 -0400 |
This make sense,but if we can't even agree on what the public perceives as a threat that they know nothing about,until a patch comes out or a full blown exploit shows up ITW (such trivial bullshit),how can we even say that we agree on the terms like disclosure,vulnerability,etc,etc,etc. How about we all agree that certain things can have different terms that mean the same thing.It's all semantics,really.I'm not going to go to New Orleans and tell them they speak English all wrong,although an English professor might try. Would he get anywhere?Very doubtful.Same thing applies here. Cheers, Scott Gadi Evron wrote:
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007, Charles Miller wrote:On 26/09/2007, at 5:02 AM, Gadi Evron wrote:Okay. I think we exhausted the different views, and maybe we are now able to come to a conlusion on what we WANT 0day to mean. What do you, as professional, believe 0day should mean, regardless of previous definitions?As a professional, I would be happy to see terms like '0day' banished from the lexicon entirely. It's an essentially meaningless -- all third-party exploits are zero-day to _somebody_ -- term of boast co-opted from the warez scene, and we can do perfectly well without it. Quibbling over its precise definition seems a ridiculous waste of bytes.It would if we are to stay stuck in our niche, but you need to remember - security is about niches, we are all experts -- but in very specific fields. These past 2 years we faced multiple targeted attacks with previously unknown vulnerabilities. We experience MASSIVE exploitation of users with 0days used on web sites and ine mail, etc. As an industry, as professionals, it is time to get our act together on the basics. I am operations manager for ZERT, and for me, this is indeed at the very heart of the matter. How you define this silliness is directly linked to how you do two of the most essential parts of security: 1. Vulnerability disclosure - for researchers. 2. Incident response - for.. responders. If a vulnerabiliy is fully disclosed, unpatched, being actively exploited, etc. caused real confusion, and non of us, or any of the written material, can agree on the basics. It's not about fighting on what 0day means as much as it is about how we as an industry, a community, conduct ourselves and can reach a common language, which directly impacts operations. So, if WMF was disclosed today after being actively exploited itw for a while, what would you call it? How would you respond to it? How long would it stay unpatched and when will you realize its importance?CGadi.
_______________________________________________ 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] defining 0day, scott |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [Full-disclosure] JSPWiki Multiple Input Validation Vulnerabilities, Jason Kratzer |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: defining 0day, Gadi Evron |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Full-disclosure] defining 0day, Zow |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |