Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 06:41:32 +0000
From: "Thor (Hammer of God)" <Thor@...merofgod.com>
To: "craig.wright@...ormation-Defense.com"
	<craig.wright@...ormation-Defense.com>, "Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu"
	<Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu>
Cc: 'full-disclosure' <full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk>,
	"pen-test@...urityfocus.com" <pen-test@...urityfocus.com>,
	"security-basics@...urityfocus.com" <security-basics@...urityfocus.com>
Subject: Re: SMS Banking

See my follow up email first.

Are you asserting that your entire basis for what "risk" is comprised of is the number of new vulnerabilities found in code?   Risk=code vulnerabilities?  Please tell me you know more about this industry than that.   Actually, DON'T tell me that.  I don't want to start to feel more sorry for you than I already do.

We don't need six months.  Pick whatever 100 you want.  Come up with your risk factor.  I'll deploy them, and they will be 100% vulnerable to immediate "exploitation" and I'll laugh at your "risk figures" all the way to the bank.    This is getting better by the minute.

Care to up your bet?  I'll wager 4:1 for you.  Let's make it my $100k to your $25k, even though you've already set the terms and the amount in writing previously.  I'm happy to amend this.

t

From: Craig S. Wright [mailto:craig.wright@...ormation-Defense.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 10:28 PM
To: Thor (Hammer of God); Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Cc: pen-test@...urityfocus.com; 'full-disclosure'; security-basics@...urityfocus.com
Subject: RE: [Full-disclosure] SMS Banking

I will happily do this.

"That it can be hacked, or will be hacked"
Anything CAN be hacked.

Software first. Choose 100 common software products. I will define scale here first. This will be number of vulnerabilities (new) that are found in each piece of software each month. This will also be related to the common metrics for the level of the vulnerability. This will be for 6 months. Choose the number of vulnerabilities and the impact of each of these for 6 months. It has to be commonly run software with a user base that I cannot count on one hand.

My predictions will be for these products and will have a confidence bound set at 95% (or alpha=5%).

"I further assume that the "loser" will be financially responsible for the "audits" done my way."
Are you saying that you will pay MY fees when you lose?

"won't look at the software code"
When you can get MS to give me their code this may be an issue, but it is not as yet.

Regards,
...
Dr. Craig S Wright<http://gse-compliance.blogspot.com/> GSE-Malware, GSE-Compliance, LLM, & ...
Information Defense<http://www.information-defense.com/> Pty Ltd


From: Thor (Hammer of God) [mailto:Thor@...merofgod.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 10 February 2010 3:59 PM
To: craig.wright@...ormation-Defense.com; Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Cc: pen-test@...urityfocus.com; 'full-disclosure'; security-basics@...urityfocus.com
Subject: RE: [Full-disclosure] SMS Banking

Now you're talking.  But first let's work up an actual contract.  Neither of your components define anything.  When you say that you are going to predict "risk" with your  magic formula, do you mean if the software has vulnerabilities?   That it can be hacked, or will be hacked?

Be sure to define this properly and definitively - if you end up saying that a system has a 1% change of being hacked, and I (or my auditors) hack it, would you claim you were "right"?  I question if you can even define the parameters of this bet, much less apply your formulas, but we'll see.

I also want to know what "scale" you plan to use.  So far, even though I've asked, you've not provided what the "answer" to your formula is, or how it will be applied.   I'm assuming, unless you are going to change your tune which I wouldn't doubt, that you won't look at the software code or threat models, but rather apply your formulas.  I further assume that the "loser" will be financially responsible for the "audits" done my way.

I'm more than happy to take your money, and I look forward to doing so.    Since one of your masters degrees is in law, I'm assuming you can clearly define the terms of the contract.    I will, of course, insist upon a contract, and I hope you won't mind that I have my own attorney look it over.    I'm not immediately trusting of the competence of one with a doctorate degree and multiple masters degrees who can't spell "technology" or "experience" correctly on his on-line CV.

You are officially "on."  And I'm looking forward to it.

t



From: Craig S. Wright [mailto:craig.wright@...ormation-Defense.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 7:41 PM
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu; Thor (Hammer of God)
Cc: pen-test@...urityfocus.com; 'full-disclosure'; security-basics@...urityfocus.com
Subject: RE: [Full-disclosure] SMS Banking


I have a simple answer to this. Forget the debate, rhetoric is not a scientific method of determining truth.

"Thor" wants a challenge, let's have one - a real one and not one based on verbalisations, abuse and unfounded assertions.

I suggest two components;

1       A selection of software products are tested using both processes, that is I use a model for the risk of these products, and "Thor" can make up whatever guesses he wishes. We model (or "Thor" guesses, pulls from a hat...) the vulnerabilities over a time period. The number of bugs in software as well as the risk are to be presented as a monthly estimate.

2       We model a few systems (say 50). We can use Honeypots (real systems set to log all activity without interference) run by an independent party to each of us. I use probabilistic models to calculate the risk. "Thor" does whatever he wants.

Each of the predictions is published by all parties. The one who is most accurate wins. Fairly simple?

I will even give a handicap to "Thor", I will offer to predict within a 95% confidence interval and that for me to win, at least 90 of the 100 software products and 45 of the 50 systems have to lie within my predicted range that I calculate and release. "Thor" has to simply guess better than I do no matter how far out he is.

I will put up $10,000 Au for my side. Let's see if "Thor" has something real to offer.

Regards,

...

Dr. Craig S Wright<http://gse-compliance.blogspot.com/> GSE-Malware, GSE-Compliance, LLM, & ...

Information Defense<http://www.information-defense.com/> Pty Ltd

_____________________________________________
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu [mailto:Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu]
Sent: Wednesday, 10 February 2010 7:03 AM
To: Thor (Hammer of God)
Cc: pen-test@...urityfocus.com; full-disclosure; craig.wright@...ormation-Defense.com
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] SMS Banking

* PGP Signed by an unknown key

On Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:39:39 GMT, "Thor (Hammer of God)" said:

> how about accepting a challenge to an open debate on the subject at Defcon?

"Alright folks just make yourself at home, Have a snow cone and enjoy the show"

                                -- Webb Wilder


* Unknown Key

* 0xB4D3D7B0

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