RE: Can we afford full disclosure of security holes?

From: bodzincmat_private
Date: Fri Aug 10 2001 - 16:11:02 PDT

  • Next message: Scott Blake: "Re: Can we afford full disclosure of security holes?"

    <snip>
    Wouldn't it have been much better for eEye to give the details 
    of the buffer overflow only to Microsoft?  They could have still 
    issued a security advisory saying that they found a problem in IIS 
    and where to get the  Microsoft patch.  I realized that a partial 
    disclosure policy isn't as sexy as a full disclosure policy, but 
    I believe that less revealing eEye advisory would have saved a lot 
    companies a lot of money and grief.
    </snip?
    
    Fatally flawed thinking, for several reasons:
    
    1) This worm is pretty much a carbon copy of a previous worm released months
    ago (one that worked on .htr files).  The patch for the problem was released
    long ago and should have already been applied by security-conscious
    admins...which says something about the importance of security to most
    admins.
    
    2) Vendors - including but not limited to Microsoft - have a history of
    quietly burying critical problems that aren't fully released to the public.
    Intel initially claimed that the Pentium math bug didn't affect enough
    people to merit a fix; Microsoft originally claimed that NTFS was not
    vulnerable to file fragmentation; the list continues ad infinitum.  Nothing
    is better for the public's interest than full disclosure; it forces
    (sometimes painfully) people to confront problems and deal with them.
    
    
    3) You assume that without eEye's help nobody would have known about this
    vulnerability or how to exploit it, and that by keeping quiet the problem
    wouldn't exist.  While the guys at eEye are clearly sharper than average,
    you are not giving the hacker community nearly enough credit.  Who's to say
    that this vulnerability wasn't already being quietly exploited by hackers?
    Sure, releasing code may make it easier for script kiddies, but trying to
    keep information from the public is "security through obscurity" and we all
    know how well that works.
    
    4) Lastly, I believe that eEye didn't release details of their exploit until
    a few days after they pointed out the problem and the patch, giving admins a
    short but manageable amount of time to fix the problem.
    
    CM
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Aug 10 2001 - 17:13:29 PDT