[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f3ddb5d0709280824j2d2cbfb2wba2e6fdc4cd6ea4e@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 08:24:08 -0700
From: Troy <gimmespam@...il.com>
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: New term "RDV" is born
Wouldn't UDV be more appropriate, for unpatched disclosed vulnerability? The
"R" in RDV means recent. I wouldn't consider a two-month old, but still
unpatched, vulnerability to be recent, so I wouldn't really be able to call
it an RDV. I would, however, be able to call it a UDV.
Another option would be EDV, for exploitable disclosed vulnerability, or
even just UV or EV. Why do we need to bring up the point that it's
disclosed? How could we be discussing an undisclosed vulnerability?
Content of type "text/html" skipped
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists