Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: Amazon, MSN vulns and.. Yes, we know! Most sites have vulnerabilities


From: Gadi Evron <ge () linuxbox org>
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 08:11:20 -0500 (CDT)

On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, David Taylor wrote:
Yes, I realize Milw0rm is simply posting exploits sent to them. I didn't
mean to make it sound like I was putting down Milw0rm, I am just concerned
about the number of 0day's coming out.  But, this did make me think.  Maybe
a site like this should take exploit submissions via a web based form where
the submitter has to sign an agreement stating something to the affect of:

If you are submitting an exploit for a vulnerability you discovered and did
not responsibly disclose to the vendor you are a meanie.  If you did and
they chose not to address it you are a cool person.

I agree we need to see these things if they are going to be floating around.
I just wish people would be be more responsible when they discover a
vulnerability and develop an exploit for it. Try to let the vendor know
first.


Once again we are mostly in agreement, but there is one point I do
disagree on completely.

How would having the vulnerability being exploited by Bad Guys already,
who get it via their sources, while not letting the Good Guys know about
and put pressure on the vendor to fix help out?

Like I said earlier, this isn't black and white and some vendors do things
right, still, the one thing about Full Disclosure no one can dispute,
despite whatever else it may be - it works.

Now how is the exploits being out and just us not knowing about them help
us any? The ones who use the for harm will do so regardless.

        Gadi.


On 6/23/06 10:47 PM, "Gadi Evron" <ge () linuxbox org> wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, David Taylor wrote:
Not sure if I agree with the "Most sites don't fix them" comment but I agree
there are probably a lot of people that just don't get how serious the
report is about a vulnerability in their software.

What I am worried about for the moment is milw0rm. That site releases an
average of 6 or 7 zero day exploits a day.  It has increased the workload I
have letting our IT folks know about new threats. A lot of these
vulnerabilities are web/php based but pwn3d is pwn3d.  I would imagine it
feeds a lot of the zone-h.org defacement entries. I don't see as many full
disclosure zero-day postings as I do on milw0rm.

Sorry if this doesn't fit the entire subject matter of this post but just
had to throw it out there. It is getting hard to keep up with.

What you say makes sense, but isn't that shooting the messenger?

You are right about how dire the situation is. We have all been thinking
hard on how to change it. I will wait for Steve Christey's reply as he
knows how to explain these issues far better than me.

Still, milw0rm seem like good people to me. They bring you the
information. Without them (and places like the site I am biased about,
securiteam.com, ex-FRSIRT, etc.) only the Bad Guys would know about these.

Unrelated, we should start distinguishing again between full disclosure
vulnerabilities and 0days (which can only be used while you don't know
about them / you caught itw, but definitions vary - just too many
"0days").

Gadi.
 
On 6/23/06 9:30 PM, "Gadi Evron" <ge () linuxbox org> wrote:

In this post I link to a blog entry by a guy (dcrab) who does some show
and tell about Amazon and MSN. You gotta love Full Disclosure. Full
Disclosure and why bugtraq is here is what I talk about. Just skip my text
to the end for that information.

So, yes, we know. Thanks. Yes, we know. Most sites have
vulnerabilities. Most sites don't fix them. All you have to do is pick one
arbitrarily and find them after a second to a few minutes of search.

Recently I exchanged some words on exactly this subject with Scott Chasin
(started bugtraq back in `93). This is why Full Disclosure was originally
done and part of why bugtraq was originally created. People don't often
remember why, and today attack the concept of Full Disclosure and say that
it is irresponsible to disclose vulnerabilities that way.

On some levels, I agree, but nothing is black and white even if I often
think it is.

Some companies take security seriously. Reporting to them works. Some
companies (at BEST) ignore you. Back then most companies ignored. Back
then Full Disclosure was THE silver bullet and THE solution. I recently
had the chance to discuss this with Aleph1 as well. He who strongly
believes in Full Disclosure agrees it's a different world now.

Today, the same situation is repeated with new fields. Game companies,
critical infrastructure (such as with SCADA systems), etc. who now
discover the world of vulnerability research don't know how to deal with
it. It is interesting to watch how the world of security repeats its
history.

When someone releases the information it is a fact that everyone goes and
attacks the site or builds a POC. When someone provides only with the name
of the site or skeleton details of vulnerabilities... everyone goes and
looks for what they know is there.

Back a few months ago a kiddie tried to sell an Excel vulnerability on
FD. Now, I am not sure if this is completely related but a few months
after that Microsoft released several patches for Excel. This month we
have had Excel 0days.

In the world of web security the situation is more extreme. Release the
bug? Everyone will exploit it. Release the site name? Everyone will find a
bug there TODAY.

The point is, though, that these vulnerabilities have always been there,
and they have been exploited before. We just didn't know about them. And
people are surprised when corporations and sites are broken into and their
personal data is stolen?

Here is a blog post of a guy who got sick of reporting vulnerabilities,
and after years of trying (look at the dates), finally made a small
release about MSN and Amazon (although other interesting sites are listed
there.

http://blogs.hackerscenter.com/dcrab/?p=19

Noam Rathaus recently wrote about a similar issue ("From Flaw to
Exploit"):
http://blogs.securiteam.com/index.php/archives/449

I contacted both Amazon and MS, but this is out there and once it's out
there - it's, well; out there. Full disclosure, y'know.

Gadi Evron.

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


==================================================
David Taylor //Sr. Information Security Specialist
University of Pennsylvania Information Security
Philadelphia PA USA
(215) 898-1236
http://www.upenn.edu/computing/security/
==================================================

Penn Information Security RSS feed
http://www.upenn.edu/computing/security/rss/rssfeed.xml
Add link to your favorite RSS reader





==================================================
David Taylor //Sr. Information Security Specialist
University of Pennsylvania Information Security
Philadelphia PA USA
(215) 898-1236
http://www.upenn.edu/computing/security/
==================================================

Penn Information Security RSS feed
http://www.upenn.edu/computing/security/rss/rssfeed.xml
Add link to your favorite RSS reader




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


Current thread: