> > People who publish bugs/exploits that are not being actively exploited > > *before* giving the vendor a chance to fix the flaws are clearly > > grandstanding. They're part of the problem -- not the solution. > > The REAL problem is software package maintainers who do not proactively > audit their software. These are not mutually exclusive positions, but the former argument gets more sympathy from me. In any reasonably complex software package, it is possible to miss a flaw no matter how carefully you audit your code. The measure of a good software vendor (or author) is not whether their code is 100% free of flaws (none is), but how they respond when flaws are discovered. In the case of a security flaw, revealing such a flaw before a fix is in place, especially if the revelation comes complete with an exploit script that makes anyone capable of exploiting the flaw with zero effort, is irresponsible behavior. If someone who finds a flaw is primarily concerned with minimizing the damage from such a flaw, then it makes sense to contact the author *first*. and at least give the author a *chance* to provide a fix. Someone who doesn't do this, and instead goes public with how much he knows before anyone in a position to fix the problem is informed, is more concerned with his own glory than in getting the problem fixed. I.e., he is grandstanding. --Greg
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Apr 13 2001 - 14:36:33 PDT