[Dailydave] Neal Stephenson, the EFF and Exploit Sales

[Adriel T. Desautels]

Oh I think it has the potential to cause harm, especially in the wrong
hands... which is why I think that the zero-day exploit market should be
regulated.  We're selling bullets and computers are the guns, there's no
doubting that.  That is why when we sell we are so selective.

We do our best to keep these tools in the right hands (being  a matter
of perspective of course). And really, that's the most anyone can do
right? 

What sorts of 0-day's are you seeing?  I'm very interested.

On 8/14/12 5:33 PM, Michal Zalewski wrote:
>> How can anyone expect to protect themselves from zero-day's if they can't
>> protect themselves from known issues for which patches / fixes already
>> exist?
> I generally agree, and that's why I think the APT rhetoric is somewhat harmful:
> http://lcamtuf.blogspot.com/2011/02/world-of-hbgary.html
>
> But you know, I'm also working for a company that happens to be
> routinely targeted by 0-days - so I disagree with the argument that
> 0-day trade has no potential to cause harm.
>
> /mz

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.immunityinc.com/pipermail/dailydave/attachments/20120814/3c4b3653/attachment.html>