[Full-disclosure] netdev threadjack

[josh]

Enough, I'm filter this fuck.
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone with SprintSpeed

-----Original Message-----
From: n3td3v <xploitable at gmail.com>

Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 18:17:57 
To:"Randal T. Rioux" <randy at procyonlabs.com>,full-disclosure at lists.grok.org.uk, n3td3v <n3td3v at googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] netdev threadjack


What about Gadi Evron threadjacks? He is as bad as me:

Impressive vulnerability, new. Not a 0day.

Not to start an argument again, but fact is, people stop calling
everything a 0day unless it is, say WMF, ANI, etc. exploited in the wild
without being known.

I don't like the mis-use of this buzzword.

 	Gadi.

http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/2007-September/056846.html

http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/480093/100/0/threaded

Okay. I think we exhausted the different views, and maybe we are now able
to come to a conlusion on what we WANT 0day to mean.

What do you, as professional, believe 0day should mean, regardless of
previous definitions?

Obviously, the term has become charged in the past couple of years with
the targeted office vulnerabilities attacks, WMF, ANI, etc.

We require a term to address these, just as much as we do "unpatched
vulnerability" or "fully disclosed vulnerability".

What other such descriptions should we consider before proceeding?
non-disclosure?

Gadi.

http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/480611/100/0/threaded

http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/2007-September/057005.html

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