Re: Should it be better ...

[Pablo <paa.listas () gmail com>]

Another possible consequence: This 'link-friendly' advisories lets the 
originator (a person, an institution or a fake of anyone of those) track 
the individual that routinely click on that links. Maybe just to build a 
list of people (IP->ISP->Country->Client of the ISP->Your home) 
interested in security, maybe not only for that. Who knows!? Just don't 
click on them ... or do it, nobody is watching! ;)

Regards,
Pablo.

El 10/07/2014 02:07 p.m., Fyodor escribió:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Pablo <paa.listas () gmail com 
> <mailto:paa.listas () gmail com>> wrote:
>
>     [Would] it be better to include the Advisory Details/exploit/code
>     in the body of the email to FD, and not in a link to a
>     blog/site/company so the list archive will be an archive and not a
>     index to some, possible down, link?
>
>
> Yes, it is absolutely better to include full details in the body of 
> the message rather than just a link.  I haven't been rejecting the 
> link-only messages (as long as there is at least a brief summary), but 
> they are annoying.  Not only are they a pain to read (need to open a 
> browser and/or follow a link), but they screw up the archives.  Right 
> now we're able to browse Bugtraq from more than 20 years ago, and it's 
> fascinating:
>
> http://seclists.org/bugtraq/1993/Nov/index.html
>
> But if those messages were just links to other sites, how many would 
> still work?  Hardly any.
>
> Now it's perfectly fine to ALSO include a link to the advisory on a 
> web site.  Just include full details in the body of the post too.  The 
> main exception is binary attachments.  If an attachment is more than 
> 500K or a megabyte, just link it that attachment (in the descriptive 
> text body of your post) to avoid clogging up people's mail spools. 
>  Also, if you're posting someone else's work (like a news story or 3rd 
> party blog or whatever), there may be copyright issues with just 
> pasting the whole thing into your message.  Still, try to include at 
> least the first few paragraphs or a summary so we know what it is.
>
> Thanks,
> Fyodor


_______________________________________________
Sent through the Full Disclosure mailing list
http://nmap.org/mailman/listinfo/fulldisclosure
Web Archives & RSS: http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/