Re: [ISN] Full Disclosure: How Much Security Info Is Too Much?

From: InfoSec News (isnat_private)
Date: Fri Oct 05 2001 - 00:51:22 PDT

Next message: InfoSec News: "[ISN] Symantec unveils new security appliances"

Previous message: InfoSec News: "[ISN] MS Security Plan: OK, Kind Of"
Maybe in reply to: InfoSec News: "[ISN] Full Disclosure: How Much Security Info Is Too Much?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Forwarded from: Aj Effin Reznor <ajat_private>

"InfoSec News was known to say....."
 
> In fact, Marc Maiffret of eEye says that they were scheduled to
> post the announcement a week earlier, but Microsoft contacted him
> to ask for more time, saying there was a problem with the patch
> and they needed another week to fix it.
> 
> EEye complied. Jay Dyson correctly noted that Microsoft publicly
> thanked the company for waiting until they had prepared the patch.
 
On top of that, it's been established that CR II (and possibly CR I)
had a different enough structure to be considered as having NOT been
made possible by the disclosure of eEye's findings.

-aj.



-
ISN is currently hosted by Attrition.org

To unsubscribe email majordomoat_private with 'unsubscribe isn' in the BODY
of the mail.
-
ISN is currently hosted by Attrition.org

To unsubscribe email majordomoat_private with 'unsubscribe isn' in the BODY
of the mail.

Next message: InfoSec News: "[ISN] Symantec unveils new security appliances"
Previous message: InfoSec News: "[ISN] MS Security Plan: OK, Kind Of"
Maybe in reply to: InfoSec News: "[ISN] Full Disclosure: How Much Security Info Is Too Much?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 08 2001 - 15:03:41 PDT