Home page logo

basics logo Security Basics mailing list archives

RE: [Full-disclosure] SMS Banking
From: "Craig S. Wright" <craig.wright () Information-Defense com>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:16:16 +1100

I will happily do this. 

“That it can be hacked, or will be hacked”
Anything CAN be hacked.

Software first. Choose 100 common software products. I will define scale
here first. This will be number of vulnerabilities (new) that are found in
each piece of software each month. This will also be related to the common
metrics for the level of the vulnerability. This will be for 6 months.
Choose the number of vulnerabilities and the impact of each of these for 6
months. It has to be commonly run software with a user base that I cannot
count on one hand.

My predictions will be for these products and will have a confidence bound
set at 95% (or alpha=5%).

“I further assume that the “loser” will be financially responsible for the
“audits” done my way.”
Are you saying that you will pay MY fees when you lose?

“won’t look at the software code”
When you can get MS to give me their code this may be an issue, but it is
not as yet. 

Dr. Craig S Wright GSE-Malware, GSE-Compliance, LLM, & ...
Information Defense Pty Ltd

From: Thor (Hammer of God) [mailto:Thor () hammerofgod com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 10 February 2010 3:59 PM
To: craig.wright () Information-Defense com; Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Cc: pen-test () securityfocus com; 'full-disclosure';
security-basics () securityfocus com
Subject: RE: [Full-disclosure] SMS Banking

Now you’re talking.  But first let’s work up an actual contract.  Neither of
your components define anything.  When you say that you are going to predict
“risk” with your  magic formula, do you mean if the software has
vulnerabilities?   That it can be hacked, or will be hacked?  

Be sure to define this properly and definitively – if you end up saying that
a system has a 1% change of being hacked, and I (or my auditors) hack it,
would you claim you were “right”?  I question if you can even define the
parameters of this bet, much less apply your formulas, but we’ll see. 

I also want to know what “scale” you plan to use.  So far, even though I’ve
asked, you’ve not provided what the “answer” to your formula is, or how it
will be applied.   I’m assuming, unless you are going to change your tune
which I wouldn’t doubt, that you won’t look at the software code or threat
models, but rather apply your formulas.  I further assume that the “loser”
will be financially responsible for the “audits” done my way.

I’m more than happy to take your money, and I look forward to doing so. 
  Since one of your masters degrees is in law, I’m assuming you can clearly
define the terms of the contract.    I will, of course, insist upon a
contract, and I hope you won’t mind that I have my own attorney look it
over.    I’m not immediately trusting of the competence of one with a
doctorate degree and multiple masters degrees who can’t spell “technology”
or “experience” correctly on his on-line CV.  

You are officially “on.”  And I’m looking forward to it.


From: Craig S. Wright [mailto:craig.wright () Information-Defense com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 7:41 PM
To: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu; Thor (Hammer of God)
Cc: pen-test () securityfocus com; 'full-disclosure';
security-basics () securityfocus com
Subject: RE: [Full-disclosure] SMS Banking

I have a simple answer to this. Forget the debate, rhetoric is not a
scientific method of determining truth.
“Thor” wants a challenge, let’s have one – a real one and not one based on
verbalisations, abuse and unfounded assertions.
I suggest two components;
1       A selection of software products are tested using both processes,
that is I use a model for the risk of these products, and “Thor” can make up
whatever guesses he wishes. We model (or “Thor” guesses, pulls from a
hat...) the vulnerabilities over a time period. The number of bugs in
software as well as the risk are to be presented as a monthly estimate. 
2       We model a few systems (say 50). We can use Honeypots (real systems
set to log all activity without interference) run by an independent party to
each of us. I use probabilistic models to calculate the risk. “Thor” does
whatever he wants.
Each of the predictions is published by all parties. The one who is most
accurate wins. Fairly simple?
I will even give a handicap to “Thor”, I will offer to predict within a 95%
confidence interval and that for me to win, at least 90 of the 100 software
products and 45 of the 50 systems have to lie within my predicted range that
I calculate and release. “Thor” has to simply guess better than I do no
matter how far out he is.
I will put up $10,000 Au for my side. Let’s see if “Thor” has something real
to offer.
Dr. Craig S Wright GSE-Malware, GSE-Compliance, LLM, & ...
Information Defense Pty Ltd
From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu [mailto:Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu]
Sent: Wednesday, 10 February 2010 7:03 AM
To: Thor (Hammer of God)
Cc: pen-test () securityfocus com; full-disclosure;
craig.wright () Information-Defense com
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] SMS Banking
* PGP Signed by an unknown key
On Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:39:39 GMT, "Thor (Hammer of God)" said:
how about accepting a challenge to an open debate on the subject at
"Alright folks just make yourself at home, Have a snow cone and enjoy the
                                -- Webb Wilder

* Unknown Key
* 0xB4D3D7B0

Securing Apache Web Server with thawte Digital Certificate
In this guide we examine the importance of Apache-SSL and who needs an SSL certificate.  We look at how SSL works, how 
it benefits your company and how your customers can tell if a site is secure. You will find out how to test, purchase, 
install and use a thawte Digital Certificate on your Apache web server. Throughout, best practices for set-up are 
highlighted to help you ensure efficient ongoing management of your encryption keys and digital certificates.


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]