RE: Vulnerabilities in some SCADA server softwares

看板Bugtraq作者時間14年前 (2011/03/24 02:01), 編輯推噓0(000)
留言0則, 0人參與, 最新討論串2/2 (看更多)
Michal, First; while I agree with your statement regarding the overuse of car analo= gies, the comparison is accurate and fair in this case. The vendor's custo= mers are now potentially at greater risk because of this announcement that = includes no mitigation. Second; I fundamentally disagree with the idea that public disclosure as a = means of vendor notification serves any purpose beyond tooting one's own ho= rn and causing a panic state for the application vendor and users. Anyone = who honestly believes that the "bad guys" are not watching the same lists w= here the "good guys" are communicating is operating far too close to a famo= us Egyptian river. IMHO, "public disclosure" only serves to increase the t= hreat for the vendor's customers. Third; it is in lists exactly like this on where opinions on security matte= rs and behaviors may be aired (to a degree; that's what moderators and comm= on sense are for). While it's true that a person will act as he sees fit, = you may also reasonably expect that differing opinions on that behavior wil= l be expressed when the opinions are as polarized as in the responsible vs.= public disclosure debate. HTH, Jim -----Original Message----- From: Michal Zalewski [mailto:lcamtuf@coredump.cx]=20 Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2011 2:24 PM To: J. Oquendo Cc: Luigi Auriemma; bugtraq@securityfocus.com Subject: Re: Vulnerabilities in some SCADA server softwares > Analogy: Car owner has his car speed up ending up in almost near=20 > catastrophe. Car owner goes to media outlets condemning the > manufacturer: "How could you be so reckless! Thousand of lives..." > Reality: Car manufacturer was never made aware of the issue. How do=20 > you propose a manufacturer fix an issue? Yes, the discussion definitely needed a car analogy... The author decided to follow a particular route, probably not out of malice= , but because he believes that his responsibilities to inform the public ou= tweigh the responsibility to assist the vendor. You wouldn't do the same, b= ut you haven't discovered these bugs. Unless your view is that you would rather not know about about security pro= blems at all, than see a disclosure mode you do not agree with, I do not th= ink it's fair to lash out against the reporter; and it's not particularly f= itting to do so on BUGTRAQ. /mz
文章代碼(AID): #1DYZLVwq (Bugtraq)
文章代碼(AID): #1DYZLVwq (Bugtraq)