Re: [Full-Disclosure] re: openssh exploit code?

From: S . f . Stover (attica_at_stackheap.org)
Date: 10/20/03

  • Next message: Cael Abal: "Re: [Full-Disclosure] Re: Gaim festival plugin exploit"
    To: John Sage <jsage@finchhaven.com>
    Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 06:23:22 -0400
    
    
    

    : /* snip */
    :
    : > BTW, I thought "whitehat" implied
    : > non-disclosure, which isn't really the direction I'm coming from.
    :
    : /* snip */
    :
    : Nothing of the sort.
    :
    : In fact, whitehats and blackhats often perform exactly the same tasks
    : at the keyboard while doing research, and use the same tools.
    :
    : It's just the ulitmate purpose to which the research is put that
    : differs...

    I guess I was thinking along the lines of attitude towards full disclosure. I
    think of whitehats as not wanting to expose source or even the vulnerability
    before the vendor fixes it. Greyhats then will give the vendor the
    opportunity to fix, but will release the vulnerability regardless, while the
    blackhat feels that the everyone should know when it's discovered.

    However, this does run counter to what I'll call "real" blackhats or people
    who use their exploits for gain or illegal purposes. Obviously releasing source
    so patches can be developed, IDS vendors can write signatures, etc. does not
    futher that end.

    -- 
    aka Dolph Longhorn
    attica@stackheap.org
    GPG Key ID: 0xF8F859D0
    http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?search=0xF8F859D0&op=index
    "There is no such thing as right and wrong, there's just popular opinion."
    -Jeffrey Goines
    
    

    _______________________________________________
    Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
    Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html



  • Next message: Cael Abal: "Re: [Full-Disclosure] Re: Gaim festival plugin exploit"