bugtraq - Re: International Domain Name [IDN] support in modern browsers allows attackers to spoof domain name URLs + SSL certs.

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 13:28:36 -0500
From: bkfsec <bkfsec@....lonestar.org>
To: davids@...master.com
Cc: var@...y-all.com, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com,
	Scott Gifford <sgifford@...pectclass.com>
Subject: Re: International Domain Name [IDN] support in modern browsers allows
 attackers to spoof domain name URLs + SSL certs.

David Schwartz wrote:

>
>	I disagree with this entirely. First of all, there is no incentive to buy
>low-quality materials. It's obviously nonsensical. What they do try to do is
>buy the highest quality materials they can for the cost they're willing to
>spend. If they could lower the quality and no one would notice, why don't
>they?
>  
>
Because they really couldn't get any lower in the quality chain without 
seriously impacting their customers in an obvious fashion.

The concept you're referring to is quality versus grade.  Burger King 
wants the highest quality in the lowest grade possible. 

The distinction you're making here is problematic, because you're taking 
a general statement and quantifying it to market it's in.  The problem 
with this is that Low-quality, medium grade meat would still be of a 
higher relative quality than high-quality, low grade meat.

The key here is the point "for the cost they're willing to spend" which 
is the real factor which dictates what the actual product being sold 
is.  The low cost of burgers dictates that they can't purchase truly 
high-quality meats

Take the Angus Steakburger for instance.  I love that burger - don't get 
me wrong, I'm not a fast food bigot.  However, is the Angus Steakburger 
made with the same quality of meat that a gourmet steakhouse would use?  
Obviously not. 

It's probably the best of brand in the grade that it's in, but the fact 
of the matter is that even if it's high-quality low grade steak, it's 
still very low quality in reality.

In other words: the distinction is irrelivent because, to the consumer 
and in reality, the meat is of a lower overall quality than meat they 
would buy elsewhere. 

>  
>
>>Talk about picking a bad analogy.
>>    
>>
>
>	Actually, it's really good, just not a good one to pick because most people
>have serious prejudices about the food market, just as they do about the
>medical market. Fast food restaurants provide an excellent product at a very
>low price. Yes, it's not the best possible product, but nobody could produce
>that at the same price point.
>
>	
>
Of course not.  It's pure economics, and that's why your analogy is wrong.

             -Barry