[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       dailydave
Subject:    Re: [Dailydave] The lack of hard questions
From:       Charles Miller <cmiller () securityevaluators ! com>
Date:       2008-08-27 22:43:43
Message-ID: B732043A-7B23-4345-A525-2F2FE4FAEB12 () securityevaluators ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

But the problem is, if there are only a handful of people who can make  
a reliable exploit for a particular vulnerability (or not) and none of  
them work for MS, how can MS accurately determine whether an exploit  
for a particular vulnerability will be somewhat reliable or totally  
reliable (or not possible at all)?  Doesn't anyone remember gobbles :)


On Aug 27, 2008, at 4:55 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:

> On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 09:05:42 EDT, Pusscat said:
>> My assumption would be that if it can be made reliable by anyone,  
>> then it's
>> reliable. It probably shouldn't be a quantum value, collapsed by our
>> inability ;)
>
> Yes, it only has to be weaponized once.

_______________________________________________
Dailydave mailing list
Dailydave@lists.immunitysec.com
http://lists.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]