OSEC

Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com
 
From: sockz loves you (sockz_at_email.com)
Date: Wed Oct 02 2002 - 00:12:17 CDT

  • Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

    You'll have to forgive me for not jumping in on this debate sooner.
    I was holding a going away party for a friend who's moving to China
    to teach Business English last night when I first read PHC's post.
    Woke up this morning to find my phone is down and the network is
    being patched... no internet, and the email address I post from
    doesn't support WAP :( shitty morning.

    But enough of my ranting...

    I've been watching OIS for a while now. Someone pointed me in
    their direction when the idea was still in its nacent form. And to
    be frank, it's a very good idea indeed. It solves one of the main
    problems of the security industry's current system: ie, who's on
    the recieving end of 0-day information.

    "The lack of any consensus procedures complicates the process of fixing vulnerabilities, and ultimately increases the risk that all computer users face."

    "Once the word is out to some, the risk of exploit increases dramatically, but many people still don't know about the problem."

    (source: http://www.oisafety.org/about.html)

    Die-hard whitehats will espouse in rebuttal that if admins are lazy
    then they should be punished by compromised security. A lie that
    only serves to further the paranoia and make those who are well-
    entrenched in the security industry look like gods. Most of you
    would have to be lying if you said you never considered how the use
    of "proof of concept" code in advisories could actually do more
    harm than good.

    "OIS is concerned about Internet safety as a whole. It may be true that a small number of sophisticated administrators can make beneficial use of "proof of concept" code, but its publication puts the vast number of internet users at serious risk."

    (source: http://www.oisafety.org/about.html)

    The OIS makes logical sense. Current systems in the security
    industry have vulnerability information thrown deep into the wild.
    OIS addresses that problem by directing that vuln info towards the
    people who can actually do something with it: responsible and
    serious vendors who are concerned about image and profit.

    PHC is right when they praise microsoft. The OIS is a good business
    move. It's one of the smartest move any company in the industry has
    made this year. By eliminating "proof of concept" code as far as
    microsoft products go... you secure a WIDE RANGE of products
    attached to the internet... simply because of the wide use of MS
    products. You also reduce the number of script kiddies/leeches who
    use proof of concept code, and you reduce the probability of your
    share price dropping should a major vulnerability be found. the
    OIS could even make internet stocks more stable because the company has greater control over the flow of information about its products
    and their weak points, making profits easier to predict. thats
    just an estimate though, i'm not a stock broker. hell, i haven't
    even spent more than two years studying the stockmarket.

    I support OIS whole-heartedly. It takes the power out of the hands
    of list owners and puts it back into the hands of software
    developers... the only people who can actually do something about
    the problem.

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: phchushmail.com
    Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 05:47:09 -0700
    To: full-disclosurelists.netsys.com
    Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Organization for Internet Safety (OIS) formally announced

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    PHC is very happy about this move by Microsoft and other companies
    such as Symantec/SecurityFocus.

    The FAQ is a 180 degree turn on what they promoted in the past in order to
    stuff their pockets and tend to their bottom line, but at least their new
    self-serving and highly lucrative endeavour no longer conflicts with our own
    interests. Get rid of 'proof of concept' code. Idiots shouldn't have this
    spoonfed to them on the lists.

    Keep up the good work Microsoft. We were all pulling for you.

    And SecurityFocus, congratulations on deceiving the public sheep for so
    long... convincing them you had the innocent Netizen's interests at heart
    while your profit margin widened as a result of your mastery of capitalizing
    on insecurity, scare tactics, and FUD. Little did they know how corrupt and
    criminal you were, but at least now that you've jumped into bed with
    Symantec and Microsoft you can unashamedly spread your corporate wings and
    soar without fear of reprisal by those who knew what you were up to all
    along.

    It is a glorious day indeed. We're looking forward to a few months from now
    when there'll be only tumbleweeds blowing across The Land of Bugtraq, and
    when Dug Song can go back to his monkey stomp parachute float drops from
    Crip monuments in Detroit (Dug Song hacks).

    cu

    On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 19:48:42 -0700 "Steven M. Christey" <coleylinus.mitre.org> wrote:
    >
    >For those of you who care about vulnerability disclosure issues,
    >the
    >"Organization for Internet Safety" (OIS) formally announced its
    >existence. This is the same group of security and software companies
    >that has been discussed in past months.
    >
    >The founding members are: stake, BindView, Caldera International
    >(The
    >SCO Group), Foundstone, Guardent, ISS, Microsoft, NAI, Oracle, SGI,
    >and Symantec.
    >
    >Note that my employer, MITRE, is not a member of OIS. This often
    >causes confusion because I have been involved in writing documents
    >that OIS may use as part of their own policies.
    >
    >Some articles are at:
    >
    > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/27312.html
    >
    > http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,558881,00.asp
    >
    >The OIS home page is at:
    >
    > http://www.oisafety.org
    >
    >A FAQ is at:
    >
    > http://www.oisafety.org/about.html
    >
    >
    >The FAQ should be of high interest to anybody who does vulnerability
    >research.
    >
    >- Steve
    >_______________________________________________
    >Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
    >Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
    >

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: Hush 2.2 (Java)
    Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify

    wlgEARECABgFAj2Zmy4RHHBoY0BodXNobWFpbC5jb20ACgkQ0rw64nEc6GJLvACgjiBp
    d39siuZjFZhs8T6o8H52zDcAn0ofQyvCBJX3yZe3i5QU7odkp24v
    =hv4E
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    Get your free encrypted email at https://www.hushmail.com
    _______________________________________________
    Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
    Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html

    -- 
    __________________________________________________________
    Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
    http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
    

    _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html