5 ms·

See also the dedicated page for this vulnerability, dubbed Dirty COW (for copy-on-write), aka CVE-2016-5195: http://dirtycow.ninja/ http://dirtycow.ninja/

vesinisa 10y ago
Gotta love the dedication with the Dirty COW "swag" web shop and all. Though something tells to me it's just a strange in-joke. Might be the prices? ($1,000 for a mouse pad .. oh, really?)
- kentonv 10y ago
  It would appear that the creators of the web site are not even affiliated with the people who found or fixed the bug. "Dirty COW is a community-maintained project for the bug otherwise known as CVE-2016-5195. It is not associated with the Linux Foundation, nor with the original discoverer of this vulnerability. If you would like to contribute go to GitHub." Seems fishy.
  - Senji 10y ago
    We live in a world where slightly arcane developer jokes are "SWAG squatted"
- pmoriarty 10y ago
  Whenever I see something being sold for outrageous amounts of money (like some book on Amazon which can be bought new for $40, but some people are selling used for $1400) my first suspicion is: money laundering.
- aji 10y ago
  it's definitely a joke. everything in the store is overpriced, FAQ item "how can I uninstall linux" links to a video of a guy smashing a computer, etc. look at this FAQ item: What's with the stupid (logo|website|twitter|github account)? It would have been fantastic to eschew this ridiculousness, because we all make fun of branded vulnerabilities too, but this was not the right time to make that stand. So we created a website, an online shop, a twitter account, and used a logo that a professional designer created. I think the author is just snarking about either branded vulnerabilities or the hype that this issue is getting. or both?
  - h1d 10y ago
    Definitely not funny for all the admins that had an emergency task to handle. This site needs some good updating.
    - Karunamon 10y ago
      Yeah, agreed. This page is coming up on google searches now, and the first hit is something that downplays its seriousness in the name of meta-snark. Very irresponsible on the part of the author. There's a time and a place for humor - this isn't it.
khy 10y ago
I was actually happy to see that the submitted link didn't point to the "marketing site" for the vulnerability.

vesinisa 10y ago

Gotta love the dedication with the Dirty COW "swag" web shop and all. Though something tells to me it's just a strange in-joke. Might be the prices? ($1,000 for a mouse pad .. oh, really?)

kentonv 10y ago
It would appear that the creators of the web site are not even affiliated with the people who found or fixed the bug. "Dirty COW is a community-maintained project for the bug otherwise known as CVE-2016-5195. It is not associated with the Linux Foundation, nor with the original discoverer of this vulnerability. If you would like to contribute go to GitHub." Seems fishy.
- Senji 10y ago
  We live in a world where slightly arcane developer jokes are "SWAG squatted"
pmoriarty 10y ago
Whenever I see something being sold for outrageous amounts of money (like some book on Amazon which can be bought new for $40, but some people are selling used for $1400) my first suspicion is: money laundering.
aji 10y ago
it's definitely a joke. everything in the store is overpriced, FAQ item "how can I uninstall linux" links to a video of a guy smashing a computer, etc. look at this FAQ item: What's with the stupid (logo|website|twitter|github account)? It would have been fantastic to eschew this ridiculousness, because we all make fun of branded vulnerabilities too, but this was not the right time to make that stand. So we created a website, an online shop, a twitter account, and used a logo that a professional designer created. I think the author is just snarking about either branded vulnerabilities or the hype that this issue is getting. or both?
- h1d 10y ago
  Definitely not funny for all the admins that had an emergency task to handle. This site needs some good updating.
  - Karunamon 10y ago
    Yeah, agreed. This page is coming up on google searches now, and the first hit is something that downplays its seriousness in the name of meta-snark. Very irresponsible on the part of the author. There's a time and a place for humor - this isn't it.

khy 10y ago

I was actually happy to see that the submitted link didn't point to the "marketing site" for the vulnerability.