5 ms·

They were at risk before they knew about the vulnerability. The gratitude is for the fact that it now actually gets patched.

by growse 7y ago

mehrdadn 7y ago
For getting the patch, there is gratitude. Why should they feel nicely about the following disclosure though?
- brohee 7y ago
  For all purpose, the patch is disclosure.
- tptacek 7y ago
  This is backwards. The patch is something you're getting from the vendor that put you at risk in the first place.
  - mehrdadn 7y ago
    Instead of telling me I'm being "backwards" about what people should appreciate and what they shouldn't, it'd be more helpful if you could explain your own thoughts like I asked you on the comment above (not here): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20567651 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20567651 I certainly don't follow your logic.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - tptacek 7y ago
      Why would I do that? None of your arguments on this thread appear to have been persuasive, judging from the pallor the text they're displayed in has taken. If it was just one or two comments, sure, who cares, but you've written a multitude of them, and none of them appear to be surviving. It feels like the burden of proof falls rather more strongly on you than on me at this point.
      - mehrdadn 7y ago
        > None of your arguments on this thread appear to have been persuasive, judging from the pallor the text they're displayed in has taken. You judge the persuasiveness of an argument by... the "pallor" from other users' votes? In a discussion about computer security... which is an area in which you yourself are the expert? Shouldn't you be the one whose thoughts and votes other people would look at (and frankly, quite possibly, did look at and become immediately biased by), rather than the other way around? > Why would I do that? If it was just one or two comments, sure, who cares, but you've written a multitude of them Why would you do that? Yes, good question! Why did you ignore my 3rd comment in that thread (I suppose 3 is "a multitude") where I pointed out you had not been actually addressing my argument at all in the previous 2 comments, yet still proceed to interject into this discussion instead, and after waiting for hours for the discussions with other people to finish, again waste time replying to me here with a comment devoid of any substance? I wouldn't know; that's a question only you can answer to yourself. You can "place the burden of proof on me" if you want, but the fact that you misrepresented my argument twice, refused to ever address it, moved told another thread just to tell me I'm being backwards, and now replied hours later to judge the merits of my comments by other people's downvotes in the very area you're an expert in... answers my question more fully than I could have ever hoped it would. Thanks. > and none of them appear to be surviving. You're wrong here too. At least one of them is still quite productively moving forward, with a kind user who left genuinely good replies that have actually directly addressed my arguments, and I look forward to that user's next reply.
- nullandvoid 7y ago
  The disclosure allows researchers who would have never bothered looking into that category of bug to now be aware that these issues exist in x area of a system. I'm totally baffled by your stance would you rather only the people on the black market and their buddies have access to this knowledge?

They were at risk before they knew about the vulnerability. The gratitude is for the fact that it now actually gets patched.

by growse 7y ago

They were at risk before they knew about the vulnerability. The gratitude is for the fact that it now actually gets patched.

mehrdadn 7y ago

For getting the patch, there is gratitude. Why should they feel nicely about the following disclosure though?

brohee 7y ago
For all purpose, the patch is disclosure.
tptacek 7y ago
This is backwards. The patch is something you're getting from the vendor that put you at risk in the first place.
- mehrdadn 7y ago
  Instead of telling me I'm being "backwards" about what people should appreciate and what they shouldn't, it'd be more helpful if you could explain your own thoughts like I asked you on the comment above (not here): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20567651 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20567651 I certainly don't follow your logic.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - tptacek 7y ago
    Why would I do that? None of your arguments on this thread appear to have been persuasive, judging from the pallor the text they're displayed in has taken. If it was just one or two comments, sure, who cares, but you've written a multitude of them, and none of them appear to be surviving. It feels like the burden of proof falls rather more strongly on you than on me at this point.
    - mehrdadn 7y ago
      > None of your arguments on this thread appear to have been persuasive, judging from the pallor the text they're displayed in has taken. You judge the persuasiveness of an argument by... the "pallor" from other users' votes? In a discussion about computer security... which is an area in which you yourself are the expert? Shouldn't you be the one whose thoughts and votes other people would look at (and frankly, quite possibly, did look at and become immediately biased by), rather than the other way around? > Why would I do that? If it was just one or two comments, sure, who cares, but you've written a multitude of them Why would you do that? Yes, good question! Why did you ignore my 3rd comment in that thread (I suppose 3 is "a multitude") where I pointed out you had not been actually addressing my argument at all in the previous 2 comments, yet still proceed to interject into this discussion instead, and after waiting for hours for the discussions with other people to finish, again waste time replying to me here with a comment devoid of any substance? I wouldn't know; that's a question only you can answer to yourself. You can "place the burden of proof on me" if you want, but the fact that you misrepresented my argument twice, refused to ever address it, moved told another thread just to tell me I'm being backwards, and now replied hours later to judge the merits of my comments by other people's downvotes in the very area you're an expert in... answers my question more fully than I could have ever hoped it would. Thanks. > and none of them appear to be surviving. You're wrong here too. At least one of them is still quite productively moving forward, with a kind user who left genuinely good replies that have actually directly addressed my arguments, and I look forward to that user's next reply.
nullandvoid 7y ago
The disclosure allows researchers who would have never bothered looking into that category of bug to now be aware that these issues exist in x area of a system. I'm totally baffled by your stance would you rather only the people on the black market and their buddies have access to this knowledge?