Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 02:38:52 +0200
From: Gadi Evron <ge@linuxbox.org.>
To: bugtraq@securityfocus.com
Subject: oracle not only offeder - researchers NOT responsible?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.7.5 (linuxbox.org [24.155.83.21]); Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:39:59 -0600 (CST)
X-Virus-Scanned: antivirus-gw at tyumen.ru
The following is a very well researched text from Matthew Murphy's blog
discussing the matter of disclosing vulnerabilities to many vendors (and
specifically Microsoft). Further, as I understand it, he shows how
vendors today use terms such as "responsible disclosure" to scare
researchers and claim they are NOT responsible if they don't do it their
way.
While I certainly did not dispute the facts that David Litchfield showed
of Oracle's behaviour, I did not agree with how he did it or that Oracle
is alone.
Oracle is not the only offender, and while I agree that Microsoft has
come a LONG way and takes security a whole lot more seriously than they
used to.. they still seem to not understand the security community and
treat security as a PR problem.
He shows specific cases and vulnerabilities, and is worth a read. Quite
Refreshing and very informative.
http://blogs.securiteam.com/index.php/archives/133
Gadi.
