Re: netdev threadjack

[Ureleet <ureleet () gmail com>]

gadi has a different set of issues.  at least hes just self absorbed, you
are just a moron.

On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 1:17 PM, n3td3v <xploitable () gmail com> wrote:

> What about Gadi Evron threadjacks? He is as bad as me:
>
> Impressive vulnerability, new. Not a 0day.
>
> Not to start an argument again, but fact is, people stop calling
> everything a 0day unless it is, say WMF, ANI, etc. exploited in the wild
> without being known.
>
> I don't like the mis-use of this buzzword.
>
>        Gadi.
>
>
> http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/2007-September/056846.html
>
> http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/480093/100/0/threaded
>
> Okay. I think we exhausted the different views, and maybe we are now able
> to come to a conlusion on what we WANT 0day to mean.
>
> What do you, as professional, believe 0day should mean, regardless of
> previous definitions?
>
> Obviously, the term has become charged in the past couple of years with
> the targeted office vulnerabilities attacks, WMF, ANI, etc.
>
> We require a term to address these, just as much as we do "unpatched
> vulnerability" or "fully disclosed vulnerability".
>
> What other such descriptions should we consider before proceeding?
> non-disclosure?
>
> Gadi.
>
> http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/480611/100/0/threaded
>
>
> http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/2007-September/057005.html
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/