full-disclosure - Disclose a bug, do not pass go, go directly to jail

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

From: steve at stevesworld.hopto.org (Stephen Clowater)
Subject: Disclose a bug, do not pass go, go directly to jail

No, Bret had fears that the bug may be exploited once it was disclosed on a
List, so he emailed the customers to only let them know about the bug. In
hopes of heading off a mass-owning of the software, while making sure the
customers were informed. So that the bug would be fixed

Or that was what he testified to when he took the stand, and he maintained
it during cross-examniations.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard M. Smith" <rms@...puterbytesman.com>
To: <full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com>
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 11:18 AM
Subject: [Full-Disclosure] Disclose a bug, do not pass go, go directly to
jail


> Does anyone know if this Tornado bug was ever disclosed on Bugtraq or
> any other security list?
>
> For the description of this incident, it sounds to me like there might
> be a civil case against Mr. McDanel, since he worked for Tornado and
> likely signed some sort of employee agreement, but this hardly qualifies
> as a criminal matter.
>
> Richard
>
> Jailbird appeals in bug disclosure case
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/32237.html
> By SecurityFocus
> Posted: 08/08/2003 at 07:45 GMT
>
> Bret McDanel already served his 16 months in federal prison for
> violating the Federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Now he wants to
> clear his record.
>
> McDanel was wrongly convicted under the federal computer fraud statute,
> criminal code 18 U.S.C. 1030, claims a 62-page appeal filed on McDanel's
> behalf by his new attorney, Jennifer Granick, clinical director for the
> Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School. The criminal
> code was misinterpreted to bring about his conviction, and McDanel's
> public defender denied him a fair trial, asserts the brief, filed
> Wednesday in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
>
> Between August 31 and September 5th, 2000, the 29-year-old McDanel,
> under the moniker, "Secret Squirrel," sent 5,600 e-mail letters to
> customers of his former employer, Tornado Development, Inc., a Los
> Angeles-based unified messaging business that provided Web-based e-mail,
> voice mail and other communications. McDanel's e-mails informed
> Tornado's customers of a serious vulnerability in the e-mail system
> which left e-mail login credentials, called Network Identifiers or NIDs,
> in plain view in their Web browser address boxes, which could then be
> scooped up by Web sites that harvest surfing information from visitors'
> browsers.
>
> According to prosecutors, McDanel intended to cause damage to Tornado's
> mail server by overloading it with too many messages, and caused a
> costly public relations problem by making public confidential
> information that was damaging to Tornado's reputation.
>
> But the appeal brief claims that the e-mails did not cause a denial of
> service. Instead, the systems were taken down to repair the security
> flaw, which McDanel had pointed out a year earlier at Tornado.
>
> The government's other argument was that McDaniel impaired system
> integrity by exposing the vulnerability publicly. Granick says that
> doesn't fly under existing law.
>
> ....
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
>