| 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: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 16:24:50 +0000 From: w0lfd33m@...il.com To: "Curt Purdy" <infosysec@...il.com>, full-disclosure-bounces@...ts.grok.org.uk, full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk Subject: Re: 0-day "vulnerability" Yep. Totally agree. Vulnerability exists in the system since it has been developed. It is just the matter when it has been disclosed or being exploited. I would suggest " 0 day disclosure" instead of "0 day vulnerability" :) ------Original Message------ From: Curt Purdy Sender: full-disclosure-bounces@...ts.grok.org.uk To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk Subject: [Full-disclosure] 0-day "vulnerability" Sent: Oct 28, 2010 8:48 PM Sorry to rant, but I have seen this term used once too many times to sit idly by. And used today by what I once thought was a respectable infosec publication (that will remain nameless) while referring to the current Firefox vulnerability (that did, by the way, once have a 0-day sploit) Also, by definition, a 0-day no longer exists the moment it is announced ;) For once and for all: There is no such thing as a "zero-day vulnerability" (quoted), only a 0-day exploit... Curt Purdy CISSP, GSNA, GSEC, MCSE+I, CCNA _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel _______________________________________________ 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