Re: Question About Ethics and Full Disclosure

From: Michal Zalewski (lcamtuf_at_coredump.cx)
Date: 05/21/04

  • Next message: snsadv: "[SNS Advisory No.72] Symantec Norton AntiVirus 2004 ActiveX Control Vulnerability"
    Date: Fri, 21 May 2004 00:27:40 +0200 (CEST)
    To: Tom <tommy@providesecurity.com>
    
    

    On Thu, 20 May 2004, Tom wrote:

    > I have sat on 2 vulnerabilities for a shopping cart for over a year and
    > nothing has changed. Now I have found a 3rd with new services added to
    > this shopping cart. /.../

    Security research and disclosure is hardly ever black or white. Just as
    with any other kind of creative work, there are beneficial and malicious
    uses or effects of every bit of information you discover, and endless
    arguments can be fought over which of the aspects is predominant in what
    disclosure scheme or business / research model. There is no truly
    responsible disclosure or non-disclosure, it's just a question of lesser
    evil, and there is and will be no consensus as to which is which.

    As such, you cannot ask others to provide you a reasonable answer as to
    the ethics - you have to seek it yourself and settle with an answer that
    makes you feel comfortable. Be your own compass. We can only tell you what
    the commonly accepted practice is, and whether the vendor can be
    considered negligent for his handling (or lack thereof) of this issue. In
    this particular case, the answer to the latter question is yes, assuming
    you have made all reasonable attempts to contact them (phone, perhaps?).

    Whenever dealing with a stubborn and nonresponsive commercial vendor with
    no prior experience with security, you also need to take into account a
    possible retaliatory action against you, even if you acted in the way you
    considered most ethical. These attempts are generally unlikely to succeed
    (don't bet on it, though), but may waste plenty of your time and wreck
    your nerves.

    > * Notify their customers (several 100)

    You can easily upset the vendor, and have them sue you. Naturally, you may
    have a point, but is it worth it? Besides, you'd be spamming, and this
    venue is perhaps least professional, as it would appear you are pushing a
    particular agenda to discredit the vendor.

    > * Notify the Payment Gateways they are Authorized to use (VeriSign,
    > PayPal, Authorize.NET)

    Unlikely to cause any effect, really - they're happy as long as they're
    making money.

    > * Be a total A** and just release it to all the mailing lists and at
    > DEFCON

    Up to you, really. Exposing the fact they suck at security might be quite
    beneficial for customers in the long run. On the other hand, you can
    expect some fraud/abuse in the short term.

    -- 
    ------------------------- bash$ :(){ :|:&};: --
     Michal Zalewski * [http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx]
        Did you know that clones never use mirrors?
    --------------------------- 2004-05-21 00:06 --
       http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/photo/current/
    

  • Next message: snsadv: "[SNS Advisory No.72] Symantec Norton AntiVirus 2004 ActiveX Control Vulnerability"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Call to arms - INFORMATION ANARCHY
      ... Its one thing to prove to a Vendor they have a problem in their code. ... and its not resolved by keeping "Full Disclosure" alive. ... > the Vendor for a vulnerability without accepting responsibility for your ... > feed the feature versus security mentality of many Vendors. ...
      (NT-Bugtraq)
    • Re: Call to arms - INFORMATION ANARCHY
      ... Its one thing to prove to a Vendor they have a problem in their code. ... and its not resolved by keeping "Full Disclosure" alive. ... the Vendor for a vulnerability without accepting responsibility for your ... feed the feature versus security mentality of many Vendors. ...
      (NT-Bugtraq)
    • Re: [Full-disclosure] MSIE (mshtml.dll) OBJECT tag vulnerability
      ... Full Disclosure is a good thing and anyone involved in the security ... not going to be vendor or most of the people reading this list. ... with disclosures like Michal's the community is made aware of the problem ... the questions remain: Does full disclosure make ...
      (Full-Disclosure)
    • Re: Can we afford full disclosure of security holes?
      ... Can we afford full disclosure of security holes? ... that discovered the vulnerability, so your no-disclosure policy ... This should stimulate the vendor ...
      (Bugtraq)
    • [Full-Disclosure] GUNINSKI THE SELF-PROMOTER
      ... Schneier has a little more credibility that Smith methinks. ... software companies feud over disclosure of weaknesses ... software maker about a devastating security flaw in one of its most popular ... Microsoft acknowledged that 200 ...
      (Full-Disclosure)