full-disclosure - Right, or wrong?

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 17:46:51 -0400
From: Jared DeMott <demottja@....edu>
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Right, or wrong?

All:

So, I've tried the vendor pay model for bug hunting and it wasn't always
well received.  Apparently auction sites and 3 party purchasers are
fine, but some folks don't like the idea of selling directly to the
vendor.  I was thinking that this would be ideal since the vendor would
have the most interest in knowing about/fixing the bug.  My question to
the list is this:
Is it morally right, wrong, don't know, don't care, good business, bad
business, etc.?  Either way we're moving away from that model, but I was
just curious how others on FD see it.

Blessings,
Jared

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