Re: defining 0day

["Exibar" <exibar () thelair com>]

Exactly.

 Zero Day Exploit:  A brand new exploit.  For a brand new vulnerability that 
isn't known either public or private (private = vendor only).  The Exploit 
itself is also brand new, never before known either public or private.

  Exibar

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Douglas K. Fischer" <fischerdk () fidoki com>
To: "n3td3v" <xploitable () gmail com>
Cc: "n3td3v" <n3td3v () googlegroups com>; <full-disclosure () lists grok org uk>; 
"Gadi Evron" <ge () linuxbox org>
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 3:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] defining 0day


> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] defining 0day
> From: n3td3v <xploitable () gmail com>
> To: Gadi Evron <ge () linuxbox org>, full-disclosure () lists grok org uk,
> n3td3v <n3td3v () googlegroups com>
> Date: 04/19/2008 18:44
> > On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 8:02 PM, Gadi Evron <ge () linuxbox org> wrote:
> >
> > >  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.
> >
> > I just caught a news article that summed up nicely what 0day means...
> >
> > "A zero-day flaw is a software vulnerability that has become public
> > knowledge but for which no patch is available. It is particularly
> > dangerous since users are exposed from day zero until the day a vendor
> > prepares a patch and notifies users it is ready."
> >
> > http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/144803/chinese_blogs_detail_zeroday_flaw_in_microsoft_works.html
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > n3td3v
> I would actually add one more criteria. Not only would a 0day have no
> patch available, but the vulnerability being exploited would not have
> been previously announced. In other words, the very first exposure in
> the wild of a 0day would be active exploitation of an "as of yet
> unknown" (except of course by the exploit author) vulnerability. This
> makes a true 0day all the more potent.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Doug
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

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