Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Clarification on Xitami DoS
From: full-disclosure () lists netsys com (Matthew Murphy)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 12:48:20 -0500
This thread is a good demonstration for why vendors need to be responsive to incoming vulnerability reports.
Very true. It should also be noted that this morning I did receive a response from iMatix.
Without a response from the vendor, we've now got a number of posts in which people have spent extra time to (a) try to figure out the underlying cause of the issue, (b) try to duplicate the issue, and (c) try to come up with a resolution in the absence of vendor guidance and/or a patch. Vendors often know the answers to these questions.
No kidding? Good find. :-)
Greater overall responsiveness by vendors is covered heavily by section 3 of the Responsible Vulnerability Disclosure Process draft [1]. Better responsiveness from vendors (and better coordination overall) can reduce much of this guesswork, so that sysadmins and security researchers can spend their time on more pressing issues.
How convenient. When you are talking about vendors, you harp on the part that says vendors must be responsible, but you don't bring up the part that says in order to be ethical I have to leave people vulnerable for thirty days or more without a peep... Really, there is no responsible disclosure that can be a one size fits all policy like an RFC. Experiences even with the same vendor vary by incident, so you really cannot possibly produce one list of expectations for so many potentially vulnerable vendors...
Current thread:
- Clarification on Xitami DoS Matthew Murphy (Aug 04)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Clarification on Xitami DoS Muhammad Faisal Rauf Danka (Aug 04)
- Re: Clarification on Xitami DoS Matthew Murphy (Aug 04)
- Re: Clarification on Xitami DoS Muhammad Faisal Rauf Danka (Aug 04)
- Re: Clarification on Xitami DoS Steven M. Christey (Aug 05)
- Re: Clarification on Xitami DoS Georgi Guninski (Aug 05)
- Re: Clarification on Xitami DoS Matthew Murphy (Aug 05)
- Re: Clarification on Xitami DoS Steven M. Christey (Aug 05)