Re: Google vulnerabilities with PoC

[M Kirschbaum <pr0ix () yahoo co uk>]

I have been watching this thread for a while and I think some people are being hostile here. 
 
There is nothing to gain being on eithers side but for the sake of security. As a penetration tester, writer, and 
malware analyst with a long and rewarding career...it would be absurd to admit that this is not a vulnerability. If the 
content-type fields can be altered and the API accepts it that is undoubtedly a vulnerability, I believe that it 
shouldn't be there. It would be a shame to say that this is not a security problem. I have seen different responses on 
this thread but having seen the proof of concept images as well I just think that some of the people commenting here 
are just being hostile. 
 
It doesn't take much for somebody in the field, to see clearly that Google does not want to pay. And I bet any amount 
of money that the bug bounty program is a way for filing potential threats by name and bank details.
 
Rgds,
M. Kirschbaum

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