Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 11:00:32 -0400
From: SMiller@...min.com
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Full-Disclosure Digest, Vol 89, Issue 10

My disclosure concerns as a user are twofold. When it comes to serious and 
readily exploitable vulnerabilities, I want to be informed in the minimum 
period of time that allows the vendor to investigate and acknowledge, and 
either repair immediately, or give a definite, short-term timetable for 
doing so, in order to allow me to implement my own safeguards, if 
necessary (which seems to be what has been addressed in this thread up 
until now) To me, 30 days should be at least adequate in such cases. I 
also want to keep track of historical responses by vendors to bugs of all 
kinds so that I can identify those vendors who have terribly inadequate 
development cycles, standards, and practices. Those vendors I want to 
completely avoid in the future to the extent possible.

-S. Miller

>full-disclosure-bounces@...ts.grok.org.uk wrote on 07/09/2012 07:00:01 
AM:
> From: full-disclosure-request@...ts.grok.org.uk
> To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
> Date: 07/09/2012 06:58 AM
> Subject: Full-Disclosure Digest, Vol 89, Issue 10
> Sent by: full-disclosure-bounces@...ts.grok.org.uk
> Today's Topics:
>    9. Re: How much time is appropriate for fixing a bug?
>       (Georgi Guninski)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 9
> Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 13:20:11 +0300
> From: Georgi Guninski <guninski@...inski.com>
> Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] How much time is appropriate for fixing
>    a bug?
> To: Stefan Kanthak <stefan.kanthak@...go.de>
> Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
> Message-ID: <20120709102011.GA1988@...okote.iziade.m$>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 02:07:52PM +0200, Stefan Kanthak wrote:
> > "Thor (Hammer of God)" <thor@...merofgod.com> wrote:
> > 
> > | Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
boundary="===============0734760750=="
> > 
> > Please stop posting anything but text/plain.
> > 
> > > If you really care about the security of the industry, then submit 
it and
> > > be done with it.  If and when they fix it is up to them.
> > 
> > OUCH!?
> > The "industry" will (typically) not fix any error if the cost for 
fixing
> > exceeds the loss (or revenue) that this fix creates, including the 
vendors
> > gain/loss of reputation, gain/loss of stock value, loss of money in 
court
> > cases or due to compensations, loss of (future) sales due to 
(dis-)satisfied
> > customers, ...
> > 
> > Joe Average can't tell the difference between a program which is 
designed,
> > developed, built and maintained according to the state of the art, and 
some
> > piece of crap that is not. He but only sees the (nice or promising) 
GUI of
> > the product and it's price tag.
> > 
> > Stefan Kanthak
> >
> 
> i agree that Thor is writing pure corporate crap.
> 
> note that he is contradicting himself: in another thread he
> wrote basically "people do stuff for money and getting laid".
> 
> in this thread he is using the buzzwords "self promotion"/
> "ego-substantiation" which don't appear to fit the above model
> of motivation and are certainly wrong for most members of FD.
> 
> probably in the next thread he will use the buzzword "irresponsible".
> 
> i suppose in his glass house world he expects hackers to give the
> 0days to vendors and keep silent, busting vendors profits for free
> so they don't accused of the ego related irresponsible crimes.
> 
> f*ck it, i expect the final usa crisis to partially fix the model.
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> End of Full-Disclosure Digest, Vol 89, Issue 10
> ***********************************************

Content of type "text/html" skipped

_______________________________________________
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