[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:52:27 +0000
From: mancha <mancha1@...o.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: bperry.volatile@...il.com
Subject: Re: Qualys Security Advisory - CVE-2015-3245
userhelper - CVE-2015-3246 libuser
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 12:37:29PM -0500, Brandon Perry wrote:
> Prefer the term coordinated disclosure.
>
> Sent from a phone
>
> > On Jul 24, 2015, at 10:56 AM, mancha <mancha1@...o.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 08:43:43PM +0200, Leif Nixon wrote: Qualys
> >> Security Advisory <qsa@...lys.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> Hello, it is July 23, 2015, 17:00 UTC, the Coordinated Release
> >>> Date for CVE-2015-3245 and CVE-2015-3246. Please find our
> >>> advisory below, and our exploit attached.
> >>
> >> *Why* are you releasing a full exploit just minutes after the patch
> >> is released?
> >>
> >> (Disclosure: I am employed by Red Hat, but this is my purely
> >> personal question.)
> >>
> >> -- Leif Nixon
> >
> > There was absolutely nothing wrong with Qualys' timing. When the
> > embargo ends, it ends.
> >
> > The real problem is the underlying model: "responsible disclosure".
> > It's nothing more than a CYA strategy that doesn't maximize the
> > ecosystem's welfare. The positive-sounding name fools some into
> > thinking it a good thing.
> >
> > --mancha
Agreed. Coordinated disclosure is much more precise.
Also, it's judgment-free unlike the loaded term "responsible disclosure"
that implies alternative disclosure models like full disclosure are
irresponsible.
--mancha
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
