* Matthew Murphy:
> Let me just define "responsible disclosure" first of all, so as to
> dissociate myself from the lunatic lawyers of certain corporations
> (Cisco, HP, ISS, et al) who define "responsible disclosure" as
> "non-disclosure". The generally accepted definition of responsible
> disclosure is simply allowing vendors advance notification to fix
> vulnerabilities in their products before information describing such
> vulnerabilities is released.
Back in 2001, this was called "full disclosure", see:
<http://www.wiretrip.net/rfp/policy.html>
(The document is probably even older, use archive.org to find out.)
In retrospect, "responsible disclosure" was always more a marketing
term than anything else (just like "blended threat"). The implicit
message that other disclosure processes were irresponsible was
invaluable.
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Received on Aug 11 2005
Intro
