Bill Davidsen <davidsen <at> tmr.com> writes:
With no disrespect, I don't believe you have ever been a full-time employee system administrator for any commercial or government organization, and I don't believe you have any experience trying to do security when change must be reviewed by technically naive management to justify cost, time, and policy implications. The people on the list who disagree may view the security information issue in a very different context.
Basically you are saying that if i disagree, my view is irrelevant. What do you
expect with this kind of start.
Linus Torvalds wrote:
Unfortunately reality doesn't agree with you. Many organizations have no other effective way to convince management of the need for a fix except newspaper articles and magazine articles. A sometimes that has to get to the horror story stage before action is possible.
All those to lines to say one thing . Managing security requires social skills.
And let's not kid ourselves: the security firms may have resources that they put into it, but the worst-case schenario is actual criminal intent. People who really have resources to study security problems, and who have _no_ advantage of using vendor-sec at all. And in that case, vendor-sec is _REALLY_ a huge mistake.
I think you are still missing the point, I don't care if a security firm reads mailing lists or tea leaves, does research or just knows where to find it, they are paid to do it and if they do it well and report the problems which apply to me and the source of the fixes they keep me from missing something and at the same time save me time. Even reading only good mailing lists and newsgroups it takes a lot of time to keep current, and you see a lot of stuff you don't need.
Does this resume to :
I want my company to be in control. And nobody else please, because i do not
trust them.
Who would you want in this security board ? No hackers i believe they have no
incentive to shut the *** up, they do not care about money or their buisness or
who knows why.
So you want :
a/ everyboddy is wrong, we cannot understand,
b/ crackers "are too lazy in many cases to read the high-level hacker boards"
c/ "How can i have fix without ever having a hole ?".
Close your eyes and believe, that s the only way to achieved absolute safety.
I am not kidding, billions of people does this, it seems efficient (only few
dies by accident).
d/ the world is mad , nobody cares about security except who we are in charge
(and have no power in the politics).
e/ i don t care who does the job but i want my god damn system to have no holes.
Sorry for this rude analysis . I assume you want :
1/ a way to be alerted of the security hole of your application stack , and
those only.
2/ fix before the script kiddies.
For one the fix is quite easy, it is a matter of getting security alerts in an
easy way (maybe newsletter are getting old, what about a web as amazon does for
stuff) and a filter on your application stack.
For two, nobody can help. Script kiddies does not even read tech lists. They do
not make the scripts. Those who made them usually don't just read ML, they read
source, even binaries.
And those who make a living of cracking usually do not tell anybody. No CERT
alert. The only hope is easy to read code, audit.