Re: Evilgrade 2.0 - the update explotation framework is back

[Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu]

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 17:07:06 BST, "[lesh] Ivan Nikolic" said:

> Christian, Vladis, are you the same person?

Nope, as far as I know...

> what are your motives?

Can't speak for Christian, I'm just here trying to counterbalance all
the "ZOMG it needs to be More Secure" - quite often that's a knee-jerk
response that hasn't been very well thought out..

> do you really believe the things you are saying?

Yes, I believe that security is about trade-offs, and that often security
measures end up costing more to implement than they're actually worth.
It's one thing to wave your hands and cook up a security scheme that
*sounds* good - it's another entirely to look at it with 30 years of
experience of "what's actually *deployable*".

> you seem to be just generally negative, jumping from point to point and being very silly.

Devil's Advocate - a dirty job, but somebody has to do it.  It's been said that if
you can't come up with 3 or 4 major flaws in a proposal you make, you haven't thought
it through enough.  Since a lot of people here don't seem to do it for themselves,
somebody else has to.

Attachment: _bin
Description:

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/