[Full-Disclosure] Re: it's all about timing

From: Steven M. Christey (coleyat_private)
Date: Wed Jul 31 2002 - 22:45:46 PDT

  • Next message: Florian Weimer: "[VulnWatch] RUS-CERT Advisory 2002-08:02: Flaw in calloc and similar routines"

    The Responsible Disclosure Process draft specifically allows for
    researchers to release vulnerability information if the vendor is not
    sufficiently responsive.  Some people may disagree with the delay of
    30 days between initial notification and release, but I don't think
    there are good stats on how long it really takes vendors to fully
    address vulnerability reports - open or closed source, freeware or
    commercial.  Let's take a recent example - how much coordination had
    to happen for the zlib vulnerability?  It seems reasonable to assume
    that it took more than a day.  And the controversial "grace period"
    has the interesting distinction of being used by both Microsoft and
    Theo de Raadt.
    
    Researchers can help to shed light in this area by publishing
    disclosure histories along with their advisories.  (By the way, vendor
    advisories rarely include such information.)
    
    While the response to the proposal focused almost exclusively on how
    it impacts researchers, it lays out a number of requirements for
    vendors, primarily that they (a) make it easy for people to file
    vulnerability reports, (b) be responsive to incoming vulnerability
    reports, and (c) address the issues within a reasonable amount of
    time.
    
    IMHO, it makes a stronger impression when someone releases a security
    advisory with an extensive disclosure history that says how much they
    tried to resolve the issue with the vendor, before they released.
    
    Those who are interested in the legal aspects of "responsible
    disclosure" are encouraged to read the article by Mark Rasch at
    http://online.securityfocus.com/columnists/66.  The article basically
    says that the adoption of community standards could protect
    researchers who disclose issues responsibly, while it could also help
    vendors who seek legal recourse against researchers who are not
    responsible (for some definition of "responsible").  The former could
    happen with a community standard.  The latter may already be happening
    without one.
    
    This email is my personal opinion, not my employer's.
    
    - Steve
    (co-author of the aforementioned Responsible Disclosure proposal,
    which is presently quiet but not dead, but will always be subject to
    public feedback)
    _______________________________________________
    Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
    Full-Disclosureat_private
    http://lists.netsys.com/mailman/listinfo/full-disclosure
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Aug 05 2002 - 08:53:50 PDT