bugtraq - Re: what we REALLY learned from WMF

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]

Message-ID: <43BDB605.9010003@linuxbox.org>
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 02:12:53 +0200
From: Gadi Evron <ge@...uxbox.org>
To: Adrian Marsden <amarsden@...det.org>
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: what we REALLY learned from WMF


Adrian Marsden wrote:
> This is a silly post.... What are you trying to prove? That in some cases a company can test a patch quicker than in others?
> 
> MS understood the issue, promised a fix on their scheduled date and did better than expected.... So you criticise them....
> 
> Way to go.... Make it so they can never win.... then they won't bother... and we all know who suffers then....

I may chose MS as an example that companies CAN do better. I believe 
this "fluke" gave us the perfect example of how security incidents 
should be handled.

Why should we now settle for less?

Naturally, each problem has its own issues and time demands. That 
doesn't change the fact of the matter.

	Gadi.
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/