Re: [Full-Disclosure] How much longer?

From: Gregory A. Gilliss (ggilliss_at_netpublishing.com)
Date: 02/12/04

  • Next message: Olaf Hahn: "[Full-Disclosure] Buffer overflow in XFree86"
    To: full-disclosure@lists.netsys.com
    Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 12:54:51 -0800
    
    

    I flamed Mr. rude off list, but there is one point that I would like to
    respond to on list...

    The original poster asked whether a development was due to an unofficial
    government policy.

    Aside from all the nastier parts of the PATRIOT act (and Magic Lantern and
    the other stuff that's already been mentioned), and given the complexity of
    modern software, backdoors from vendors and strategic agreements between
    government and private industry, whether for their own use or as part of
    a 'comic-book neo-con conspiracy', are real. 'nuf said.

    G

    On or about 2004.02.12 12:18:36 +0000, cptnug (cptnug-fulldisclosure@batray.net) said:

    > My own opinion is that most software is so bad security-wise there's just
    > no need for explicit backdoors. The US government TLAs can trust software
    > developers (and if not them, the users) to make enough mistakes that they
    > don't need to force or ask them to put in backdoors on purpose.

    -- 
    Gregory A. Gilliss, CISSP                              E-mail: greg@gilliss.com
    Computer Security                             WWW: http://www.gilliss.com/greg/
    PGP Key fingerprint 2F 0B 70 AE 5F 8E 71 7A 2D 86 52 BA B7 83 D9 B4 14 0E 8C A3
    _______________________________________________
    Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
    Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
    

  • Next message: Olaf Hahn: "[Full-Disclosure] Buffer overflow in XFree86"

    Relevant Pages