4 ms·
Personally i'm still not convinced this is good or bad. Protect users AND educating script kiddies, this is a hard trade off, and all lazy updating users will
by thinkMOAR 10y ago
Personally i'm still not convinced this is good or bad.
Protect users AND educating script kiddies, this is a hard trade off, and all lazy updating users will be more vulnerable then before.
(more being more script kiddies, not so much more vulnerabilities).
As long as it is done responsible and vendors are given chances to fix this before. Not disclosing is worse i guess in any case.
However,
"We encourage users to verify that auto-updaters have already updated Flash"
While adobe recommends to not install it, meh.. :)
- cmdrfred 10y agoScript kiddies used to mean someone who downloaded a DOS tool for example and ran it. As far as I know Google didn't release such a tool, nor is one available. Did the definition change?
- Shanea93 10y agoThat's my understanding of the popular usage, however I have noticed people also using it to refer to people who take advantage of known security issues using "simplistic" programming languages and techniques. IE, a script kiddie is more likely to use python or php to SQL inject than to execute a timing attack against a crypto library.
- thinkMOAR 10y agoWhy a 'dos' tool? They download 'scripts/utils' and simply use them and call themselves hackers. They don't always do a denial of service attack. That never changed, but perhaps you never learned it correctly. Telling the world about vulnerabilities is a knife that cuts on two sides. Inform users about security. Inform wankers how to abuse stuff.
- cmdrfred 10y agoJust an example: "someone who downloaded a DOS tool for example"
- thinkMOAR 10y agohttp://www.bbc.com/news/technology-37833146 http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-37833146