|
|||||||||||
|
RE: [Full-disclosure] 0day: PDF pwns Windows
From: Michael Bitow <michaelb(at)chef.org>
Date: Fri Sep 21 2007 - 12:25:59 EDT Name calling and arguing about semantics is about as useful and enjoyable as a fart in an elevator. Sheesh. I thought it was just the Quake players that got in to e-peen pissing contests. And yes, I'm top-posting!
-----Original Message-----
On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 06:34:03PM -0400, Joey Mengele wrote:
Tell me something -- what do *you* think "zero day" means that differentiates it from "not zero day"? I keep seeing people use the term "zero day" (or "0day" or however you want to spell it) without any regard for how this is meant to differentiate it from some alternative to "zero day", and I have to wonder what these people think the term means. Do you just regard it as a way to make discovery of a vulnerability as more "important" or "exciting"? Why exactly use the term if it has no meaning other than "look at this!"? There is no such thing as a "zero day vulnerability". A "zero day exploit" is an exploit that has been used to compromise systems by the "bad guys" before the "good guys" discovered it or, arguably, an exploit being used by the "bad guys" before the "good guys" have developed a patch for it. It's not a proof of concept that no "bad guy" has any use for, and it's not a vulnerability that someone outside of a vendor discovered before the vendor announced its discovery. If you have a definition of the term "zero day" in a computer security context that contradicts mine, I'd love to read your reasoning and see your sources. After all, I can't learn anything new if I ignore things that I don't already know. -- CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ] MacUser, Nov. 1990: "There comes a time in the history of any project when it becomes necessary to shoot the engineers and begin production."Received on Fri Sep 21 15:00:29 2007 This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Oct 28 2007 - 06:16:55 EDT |
||||||||||
|
|||||||||||