bugtraq - RE: Publishing exploit code

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

Message-ID: <9E97F0997FB84D42B221B9FB203EFA27010ED930@dc1ms2.msad.brookshires.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 13:33:57 -0500
From: "Todd Towles" <toddtowles@...okshires.com>
To: "Erick Mechler" <emechler@...hometer.net>,
	"Joachim Schipper" <j.schipper@...h.uu.nl>
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: RE: Publishing exploit code - what is it good for

 Erick,

How do you plan to mitigate known vulnerabilities in your network
without a POC? I guess you can just assume your systems are vulnerable
and then wait on the vendor to fix it...with your hands tied? I am sure
Microsoft will have that patch out next year for you. 

Exploit code is used by people to mitigate known vulnerabilities where a
patch isn't out yet. It protects people...but it does hurt people. So do
cars..so do guns. But pointing your gun (network) around blind (without
knowing if you are truly vulnerable) is not something a lot of people
want to do.

I have seen public exploit code force a company to fix the issue. You
are right, you have to assume blackhats have the exploit, do you not
want to same tool? To study to make a plan of blocking the attack before
a patch is released.

I remember a couple of IE vulns that were "patched" but security
researchers used modified public exploit code to show that only the
attack vector was patched, not the core problem. Forcing a company to
look deeper into the issue. Everyone is entitled to their own view, just
my 2 cents.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: full-disclosure-bounces@...ts.grok.org.uk 
> [mailto:full-disclosure-bounces@...ts.grok.org.uk] On Behalf 
> Of Erick Mechler
> Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 12:37 PM
> To: Joachim Schipper
> Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk; bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
> Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Publishing exploit code - what 
> is it good for
> 
> :: Blackhats may get along with only a handful of exploits, if they're
> :: willing to try to find targets to match their collection, but a
> :: pentester should have the collection to match the target.
> :: 
> :: This is doubly true if we're not talking about a dedicated 
> pentester,
> :: but about a sysadmin with a networking/security background 
> who likes to
> :: verify that the patches did, indeed, work.
> 
> To that I say let the people producing the patches deliver 
> the exploit code as a POC that the patches did, indeed, work. 
>  Releasing exploit code before the patch is released helps 
> nobody except the blackhats.
> 
> :: Also, exploits will be distributed, publicly or otherwise 
> - doing it in
> :: the open means we know what happens when.
> 
> You should, as an admin, assume that once a vulnerability is 
> released, the exploit has been too, whether you see it 
> attached to the vuln announcement or not.
> 
> Cheers - Erick
> _______________________________________________
> 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/