RE: Get your computer viruses here!

["Randy Abrams" <abrams () eset com>]

I gotta go for a while. It's Nick's shift now :) 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: funsec-bounces () linuxbox org 
> [mailto:funsec-bounces () linuxbox org] On Behalf Of Nick FitzGerald
> Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 5:16 PM
> To: funsec () linuxbox org
> Subject: Re: [funsec] Get your computer viruses here!
>
> val smith (top-posting to Jason Geffner):
>
> > Maybe nothing good has ever come out of malware except for 
> some good 
> > researchers / analysts. Definitly requires more  research 
> on my part.
>
> Many/most/all of whom would have ended up doing something 
> similar anyway as its largely a mindset thing...
>
> > The idea of software protections came of of copyright needs sure, 
> > however one could argue that advances in that field do 
> sometimes come 
> > from malcode authors.  ...
>
> Which is a "good thing" why?
>
> Competent copy-protection system developers would devise 
> their own ever more difficult to crack protections on their 
> own (at least as long as the money made their spending their 
> time on it worthwhile).  That's the way things work.  That 
> they could rip ideas from essentially public domain, 
> initially malware-specific code is just a bonus to them 
> (though potentially exposes them to patent and other 
> liabilities if they don't do the appropriate due-diligence on 
> the code/idea they're ripping).
>
> Suggesting that you making samples available might improve 
> the work of the anti-piracy/DRM/etc folk is hardly going to 
> win plaudits for your project either...
>
> > And to Randy re biological viruses, no I was making the 
> argument that 
> > sometimes good things can come out of something considered 
> to ONLY be bad.
>
> Yes, a well-understood point, _in the NATURAL realm_.  I'd 
> have thought the point here though is that although some 
> "good stuff" has come from, and it seems likely we'll 
> continue to see more such "advances", have you ever seen a 
> free-for-all biological virus "analysis and experimentation" 
> lab?  Nope -- because of the risks of allowing the 
> less-than-highly-capable access to such material, it is kept 
> in extremely strictly controlled environments and locations.  
> Computer viruses and other malware are not as dangerous as 
> their bilogical counterparts, but responsible access should 
> still be practiced.
>
> > Also you'll noticed i put "new" in quotes. I know its not 
> really a new 
> > idea although maybe someone could enlighten me as to a previous 
> > project that tried to profice a shared analsys experience 
> that wasn't limited to "vetted"
> > researchers.  ...
>
> Investigate the history of VX in general -- you'll find that 
> many such operations have "justified" themselves on the basis 
> that they are "strictly for educational purposes" and the 
> like.  All nonsense of course, just as yours is.
>
> > ...  I guess I don't feel like I can make the decision as to who is 
> > vetted and who isnt. If I did then perhaps I would be 
> "playing God" in 
> > my kingdom as a previous poster suggested.
>
> So it's better that you just let all and sundry in to do 
> whatever they want, benefit however they can and so on?
>
> In short, you are admitting that you have no scruples for, 
> faced with what you clearly recognize as a moral dilemma, you 
> decide to solve it by ignoring it.  The ethically principled 
> solution to your dilemma -- should I do this reposnibly or 
> not?, the responsible approach means playing God, I don't 
> want to play God -- is, of course, to NOT proceed with the 
> project, but that's not the approach you took, so we know you 
> are not ethically principled.
>
> Your bio says you have over ten years compsec experience, yet 
> you display the ethics of a "normal" 10-12 year old.  I'm 
> glad I'm not one of your former customers or employers...
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Nick FitzGerald
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
> https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
> Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
>
> __________ NOD32 1.1343 (20051228) Information __________
>
> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> http://www.eset.com

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.