bugtraq - RE: [VulnWatch] Details of Sybase ASE bugs withheld

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.BSO.4.55.0503221602240.7910@vikki.vulnwatch.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 16:26:26 -0500 (EST)
From: Chris Wysopal <weld@...nwatch.org>
To: "Marchand, Tom" <Tom.Marchand@...sfl.com>
Cc: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: RE: [VulnWatch] Details of Sybase ASE bugs withheld

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, Marchand, Tom wrote:

> If the bug was found by disassembling Sybase's code then Sybase probably
> does have a legal position to do this.  I haven't read Sybase's EULA but
> most have a provision prohibiting reverse engineering of code.

It is certainly possible to discover security flaws without reverse
engineering. You don't need to get to the point where you know how the
internals of a program are built. Injecting crafted data into a program's
inputs and observing whether or not it crashes or misbehaves is simply
using the program.

If it is decided by the courts that all security analysis is covered by a
blanket EULA no reverse engineering provision, a potential solution for
security researchers is to require that the vendor indemnify them from
reverse engineering civil suits before disclosing information them.

-Chris