Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 01:22:16 -0500
From: Simon Smith <simon@...soft.com>
To: Roman Medina-Heigl Hernandez <roman@...labs.com>,
	Untitled <full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk>
Subject: Re: iDefense Q-1 2007 Challenge -I WILL BUY FOR
 MORE

Roman and List, 
    Let me address this issue once and for all, because the "issue" is
really quite simple. I am offering security researchers the ability to have
their exploits legally purchased for a price that is higher than the
standard prices offered by the majority of third parties. The researchers
who decide to participate will be sent a legally binding contract. This
contract will specifically protect the researcher and buyer and clearly
spell out the terms and conditions of business.
  
    And as for Roman's argument, I can assure him (and all of you) that the
exploit code will be put to ethical, legitimate and legal use. The only
people that will be using the exploit code are established U.S. based public
or private sector corporations/parties. Other than that I am not going to
get into a debate about it.

    Lastly, it amazes me that so many people complain about the prices that
they sell their exploits for, then, when someone like me comes around to try
to give them fair pricing in a legal way, they'd rather complain about that
than take up the opportunity. This reminds me of old women who are always
trying to find a reason to complain. Nothing more than a bunch of grumpy old
women. ;]

    

    

   

    
    

    


On 1/18/07 7:53 PM, "Roman Medina-Heigl Hernandez" <roman@...labs.com>
wrote:

> Then you cannot assure that your buyer will make an ethical use of the
> exploit. So what's the real difference against selling it to another people
> (known or "unknown", where "unknown" could be black-hats, script-kiddies or
> whoever making the higher bid)? The receipt? :) I mean, if I (as a
> researcher) don't mind what the exploit will be used for, I'd simply look
> for the higher bidder (I guess).
> 
> And you didn't really answer my former two questions... Please, could you
> provide some specific examples of typical ways to justify ROI? Which is the
> typical profile/s of enterprise/s buying exploits? (without naming
> particular enterprises, of course).
> 
> 
> 
> Simon Smith escribió:
>> Oh, 
>>     About your ROI question, that varies per buyer. I am not usually told
>> about why a buyer needs something as that's none of my business.
>> 
>> On 1/18/07 4:22 AM, "Roman Medina-Heigl Hernandez" <roman@...labs.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Simon Smith escribió:
>>>> Amen!
>>>>     KF is 100% on the money. I can arrange the legitimate purchase of most
>>>> working exploits for significantly more money than iDefense, In some cases
>>>> over $75,000.00 per purchase. The company that I am working with has a
>>>> relationship with a legitimate buyer, all transactions are legal. If you're
>>> <naive>
>>> 
>>> I was wondering which kind of (legal) enterprises/organizations would pay
>>> $75000 for a simple (or not so simple) exploit.
>>> - governmental organizations (defense? DoD? FBI? ...)
>>> - firms offering high-profiled pen-testing services?
>>> - ... ?
>>> 
>>> What about the ROI for such investment?
>>> 
>>> </naive>
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> -Roman
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
>>> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
>>> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
>> 
>> 


_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists