Home page logo
/

fulldisclosure logo Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: SMS Banking
From: Rosa Maria Gonzalez Pereira <analuis13 () hotmail com>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:19:43 -0400





Bueno porque no me pagan a mi de una vez, acepto 50,000.00



From: Thor () hammerofgod com
To: craig.wright () Information-Defense com; Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 19:56:40 +0000
CC: full-disclosure () lists grok org uk; pen-test () securityfocus com; security-basics () securityfocus com
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] SMS Banking








RE: [Full-disclosure] SMS Banking








*ME* stop trying to weasel?  Wow.  At least you’ll
have a shot at comedy when this is over.

 

Answer my questions, “Dr.”  as posted. 
Include the system YOU said YOU would set up.  Include that if it gets
breached ANY WAY I WANT within 6 months that you will pay me $100,000.

 

Is that simple enough for you?  Is there any part of that
that one can deem as “weaseling?”   Product the freaking
contract already and stop wasting our time.  

 

t

 







From: Craig S. Wright
[mailto:craig.wright () Information-Defense com] 

Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 11:51 AM

To: Thor (Hammer of God); Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu

Cc: pen-test () securityfocus com; 'full-disclosure';
security-basics () securityfocus com

Subject: RE: [Full-disclosure] SMS Banking





 

Tim,

You stated “You are officially
“on.” “ to my challenge.

 

I am arranging a contract. An attorney has been arranged for
both the contract and the escrow.  This will take a number of days. 

 

The amount has upped and there are a couple other aspects, but
the initial framework holds. Stop trying to weasel. 

 

Regards,



...

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.

 

t

 

 

 







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.


Regards,


...


Dr. Craig S Wright
GSE-Malware, GSE-Compliance, LLM, & ...


Information Defense Pty Ltd


 






                                          
_________________________________________________________________
Discover the new Windows Vista
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

  By Date           By Thread  

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