lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 14:59:59 -0500 (CDT) From: Gadi Evron <ge@...uxbox.org> To: Brian Loe <knobdy@...il.com> Cc: "Thor (Hammer of God)" <thor@...merofgod.com>, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com, Chad Perrin <perrin@...theon.com>, Crispin Cowan <crispin@...ell.com>, Casper.Dik@....com, "pdp (architect)" <pdp.gnucitizen@...glemail.com>, full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk, Lamont Granquist <lamont@...iptkiddie.org>, Roland Kuhn <rkuhn@....physik.tu-muenchen.de> Subject: Re: defining 0day On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, Brian Loe wrote: > On 9/25/07, Gadi Evron <ge@...uxbox.org> wrote: > >> Okay. I think we exhausted the different views, and maybe we are now able >> to come to a conlusion on what we WANT 0day to mean. >> >> What do you, as professional, believe 0day should mean, regardless of >> previous definitions? > > > Seems to me that definitions, and language itself, is a product of > evolution. You can't just remove all previous meanings. Its better > anyway to stick to the most accepted, acknowledged and DOCUMENTED > definitions: No longer good enough. We can get a press scare over a public vuln release, or a wake-up call. I think we can do better as an industry.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists