full-disclosure - Fwd: fuck symantec & boycott bugtraq

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce john-users owl-users popa3d-users / xvendor oss-security / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

This website is powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux security-enhanced OS

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [month] [year] [list]

From: woot_woot_root at yahoo.co.uk (Faulty)
Subject: Fwd: fuck symantec & boycott bugtraq

The links that you posted come from google's cache which it collects when it crawls webpages if you follow the links to the bugs they arent there.
http://online.securityfocus.com/bid/1780/exploit/
http://online.securityfocus.com/bid/4485/exploit/
Regards
Faulty
www.b0f.net
 Blue Boar <BlueBoar@...evco.com> wrote:ohnonono@...hmail.com wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> 
> I am sorry I was not clear because i was angry. Symantec has conviently removed all the exploits from the database. How can you trust someone who lies?
> 
> http://online.securityfocus.com/bid
> 
> Where are the exploits? Not like that is going to really stop any script kiddies or hackers anyway. It just goes to shows you cant trust symantec (something most of us knew anyway).
> 

Thanks for clarifying. Indeed you are correct. The "exploit" tab has been 
entirely removed. Interestingly, at least some of the exploit files are 
still there:
http://216.239.33.100/search?q=cache:9Fbx2EFZanAC:online.securityfocus.com/bid/1780/exploit/
http://216.239.33.100/search?q=cache:Qjh1bVr7VFYC:online.securityfocus.com/bid/4485/exploit/

I wonder if the files being left available is simply an oversight that 
hasn't been addressed yet. I wonder if they were left available 
intentionally because the commercial vulnerability database customers still 
get access to the exploits, and possibly their version of the vulnerability 
database entries still include the exploit section that links to those files.

When I was working there, we would occasionally be accused of "selling 
exploits". Other people's exploits, to be more specific. I never felt 
that the accusation was accurate, because of the fact that the exploits 
were made available to the public, and SecurityFocus was simply acting as 
an archive. If they have removed them from public view, and are still 
keeping them around for the paying customers, then perhaps that accusation 
is now valid.

Used to be that if an exploit writer didn't want their exploit saved for 
posterity on securityfocus.com, they could ask, and it would be removed. I 
guess now one will have no way of knowing if it's there or not.

BB

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

---------------------------------
With Yahoo! Mail you can get a bigger mailbox -- choose a size that fits your needs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20030110/3929f193/attachment.html