full-disclosure - Re: Fwd: 0day auctions, should they be outlawed?

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: <6545a5ad0811031445m4d208ca8l9764000cbace3b4d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 22:45:54 +0000
From: "Email Cash" <and.email.cash@...il.com>
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Fwd: 0day auctions, should they be outlawed?

I think that ZDI/TippingPoint and the other legit private outfits have
been doing a pretty decent job so far. Why bring the law into it?


On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 7:29 PM, william@...kovics.net
<william@...kovics.net> wrote:
> There should be a FD listing fee for the 0day so the list can garner a
> commission from the sale.
>
> Absolutely no increase in government should be directed toward 0day sale
> prevention or enforcement.
> The answer to these things rarely should incude the words 'government',
> 'task' and 'force'.
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: "n3td3v" <xploitable@...il.com>
> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 11:00 AM
> To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
> Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Fwd: 0day auctions, should they be outlawed?
>
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 6:49 PM, Marc Balmer wrote:
>> * n3td3v wrote:
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: n3td3v
>>> Date: Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 1:15 PM
>>> Subject: 0day auctions, should they be outlawed?
>>> To: n3td3v
>>>
>>>
>>> i'll be lobbying soon to outlaw 0day auctions, this means the banning
>>> of 0day sales on the internet. i've noticed an increased level in 0day
>>> sales lately on mailing lists, and web sites... i think this should be
>>> against the law. let me know what your opinions are on this, so i can
>>> form what im going to say when i lobby people about it. cheers.
>>
>> wrong approach. there should be a law that the state has to buy
>> all 0days and publish them here on undisclosure. that would be
>> good use of tax money... ;)
>>
>
> the latest guy put up an alias that says "anti security" and i guess
> demanded money to make the 0day be known, and then there is still no
> guarantee that the affected vendor or the government is going to get
> wind of the exploit. that means, there is going to need to be a
> government task force in place to infiltrate these sales, to make sure
> the good guys are getting the info before blackhat elements. is there
> already a government strike force in place to buy these "0day offers"?
> or are the government sitting on their hand as per usual? im becoming
> increasingly frustrated about what is going on. cheers.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>

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