Vulnerability Development mailing list archives

Re: illegal cheer (was: Re: CodeGreen beta release (idq-patcher/antiCodeRed/etc.)


From: "Meritt James" <meritt_james () bah com>
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 14:50:44 -0400

Precisely!  The laws are not just for you, nor just for Microsoft, but
ALL code writers should attend!

Markus Kern wrote:

Meritt James wrote:

News flash:  You and your kin are not the entire world.

Wouldn't you like M$ to pay attention to those laws?  Where do you think
the vulnerabilities come from?

Laws aren't solely for Microsoft. Everyone else would be responsible for
bugs in their code, too. Imagine someone is sued because his shareware
ftp server has a buffer overflow. I bet Microsoft would love to run their
competition's software on some of their boxen just to sue them as soon as
a bug is found.


Markus Kern wrote:

Meritt James wrote:

THAT is an informative statement!  If a bit of consideration for the law
was made, there would be many fewer vulnerabilities in the first place.

How would consideration for the law reduce _vulnerabilities_?

I have to agree with Michael Rudel.
When we're discussing the ethics/morals of something current laws are
irrelevant.
Laws are deduced from the outcome of such discussions (or that's the way
I think it should be).

So why are YOU discussing laws, followed by a statement that what you
wrote is irelevant?

My question was related to your statement that laws would reduce vulnerabilities.
The rest to Michael Rudel's post. Two different topics.

regards,
Markus Kern


But thanks for the job security!

"Michael R. Rudel" wrote:

[snip]

It is illegal under current law, but
that doesn't mean jack to me.

[snip]

--
James W. Meritt, CISSP, CISA
Booz, Allen & Hamilton
phone: (410) 684-6566

-- 
James W. Meritt, CISSP, CISA
Booz, Allen & Hamilton
phone: (410) 684-6566


Current thread: