On 06/10/2010 09:26 AM, Susan Bradley wrote:
You commented that Microsoft needs to address a communication
problem. It's irrelevant to the full disclosure issue in my mind.
I'd honestly like to know if there is a break down in communication at
the MSRC that needs to be addressed. It appears there is one?
No. He didn't. What he said was: "Those of you with large support
contracts are encouraged to tell your support representatives that you
would like to see Microsoft invest in developing processes for faster
responses to external security reports." That sounds like he is
suggesting that companies put pressure on Microsoft to invest more
resources in external security reports to me.
Microsoft has historically been exceedingly slow to address any reported
vulnerabilities *except when people light a fire under them by
publishing exploits*. Anything less typically takes months to years to
fix. Even publicly shaming Microsoft isn't always enough. There are
known, serious, published vulnerabilities that Microsoft didn't fix for
*years*. I personally found and publicized one of them in 1998 - which
*8 years later* was still not fixed
It isn't about *communication*, it's about Microsoft treating external
reports seriously and *taking action in a timely way - even if they
don't have an 'exploit in hand'*.
Tavis indicated he suspects that the 'black hats' already know about
this particular exploit (IOW he thinks it is a '0-day' exploit already
loose in the wild).
So who, exactly, would be protected by his *NOT* publishing it? End
users? They are probably already being exploited by it.
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/