4 ms·

Reckless by Microsoft or the researcher? Cause we don't know who has been exploiting this already and by providing the tool adds pressure on Microsoft to expedi

Reckless by Microsoft or the researcher? Cause we don't know who has been exploiting this already and by providing the tool adds pressure on Microsoft to expedite this and helps people that may have already been effected have some insight into how they were compromised.

vardump 7y ago
Perhaps the pressure could have been applied privately. Like researcher gaining access to achieved milestones. As long as Microsoft's progress would have been reasonable, no release. This issue is very time consuming to fix and very easy to exploit, and it affects a large number of people, directly and indirectly. A full system compromise from unprivileged process or sandbox. Even if you don't personally use Windows, this might for example be used to compromise your data processed somewhere else. I completely agree there needs to be very strong pressure on the vendors, and 90 day response is a very effective tool at that. But there should be some kind of alternative way to apply pressure on the vendor in cases that take a long time to fix and cause devastating collateral damage. Any script kiddie can now start to use this in hours or days.
- shkkmo 7y ago
  > Perhaps the pressure could have been applied privately. Like researcher gaining access to achieved milestones. As long as Microsoft's progress would have been reasonable, no release. Perhaps you should read the thread describing the communication with Microsoft. It sounds to me like the issue was not just the complexity of the bug, but a failure of organization/communication on Microsoft's part. https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=1859 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=18...
  - vardump 7y ago
    Yeah, that doesn't look good for Microsoft. I thought they've already learned their lesson, but maybe they need to have a periodic embarrassment for that.
- tedunangst 7y ago
  I believe taviso is familiar with Microsoft applying pressure privately.
  - wolf550e 7y ago
    For example: https://twitter.com/taviso/status/1160613095523225600?s=19 https://twitter.com/taviso/status/1160613095523225600?s=19 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20171450 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20171450
zelon88 7y ago
The righteousness of your post reminds me of the climax of a Disney movie. Google does this all the time, on purpose, like clockwork. They aren't the only ones out there looking for zero days in their supply chain, but they're the only ones who ignore a vendors disclosure policy and substitute their own. For example; If Google finds a bug in your product YOU get 90 days before they put you on blast in front of 8 billion people. But if you find a bug in GOOGLE'S product and put them on blast YOU will find yourself in court. Does anyone remember the last time Microsoft or Apple went looking for zero days to drop in public on their blog about Google? They don't. Because they're professional companies with better shit to do than stir the pot. This has NOTHING to do wit supply chain security and EVERYTHING to do with putting heat on their competition. That is why PZ exists. If that weren't true PZ would be looking at non-competing products with large user bases. WordPress comes to mind. But Google doesn't compete with WordPress, so they'll never focus on it.
- temac 7y ago
  > For example; If Google finds a bug in your product YOU get 90 days before they put you on blast in front of 8 billion people. > But if you find a bug in GOOGLE'S product and put them on blast YOU will find yourself in court. Reference needed.
  - zelon88 7y ago
    > For example; If Google finds a bug in your product YOU get 90 days before they put you on blast in front of 8 billion people. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/7xqdxe/google-project-zero-hacker-iphone-bug-bounty https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/7xqdxe/google-project-zer... https://www.csoonline.com/article/2867534/microsoft-blasts-google-for-vulnerability-disclosure-policy.html https://www.csoonline.com/article/2867534/microsoft-blasts-g... Here are Google's many contradictory policies about disclosure. Notice the many discrepancies... https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/p/vulnerability-disclosure-faq.html https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/p/vulnerability-discl... https://security.googleblog.com/2010/07/rebooting-responsible-disclosure-focus.html https://security.googleblog.com/2010/07/rebooting-responsibl... https://sites.google.com/site/bughunteruniversity/nonvuln https://sites.google.com/site/bughunteruniversity/nonvuln https://www.google.com/about/appsecurity/reward-program/ https://www.google.com/about/appsecurity/reward-program/ https://www.google.com/about/appsecurity/ https://www.google.com/about/appsecurity/ https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/p/vulnerability-disclosure-faq.html https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/p/vulnerability-discl... > But if you find a bug in GOOGLE'S product and put them on blast YOU will find yourself in court. Maybe a bit of a dramatization, but the point remains. If Google finds a bug in your product: Your policy is moot. They follow their policy. If you find a bug in their product you are expected to follow their policy. In the case of Apple their "security professionals" will make jokes about you on Twitter and in the case of Microsoft they just do whatever the fuck they want. "Your patches come out on Tuesday, huh? Well that's 92 days, big-guy! Tough break..."

vardump 7y ago

Perhaps the pressure could have been applied privately. Like researcher gaining access to achieved milestones. As long as Microsoft's progress would have been reasonable, no release. This issue is very time consuming to fix and very easy to exploit, and it affects a large number of people, directly and indirectly. A full system compromise from unprivileged process or sandbox. Even if you don't personally use Windows, this might for example be used to compromise your data processed somewhere else. I completely agree there needs to be very strong pressure on the vendors, and 90 day response is a very effective tool at that. But there should be some kind of alternative way to apply pressure on the vendor in cases that take a long time to fix and cause devastating collateral damage. Any script kiddie can now start to use this in hours or days.

shkkmo 7y ago
> Perhaps the pressure could have been applied privately. Like researcher gaining access to achieved milestones. As long as Microsoft's progress would have been reasonable, no release. Perhaps you should read the thread describing the communication with Microsoft. It sounds to me like the issue was not just the complexity of the bug, but a failure of organization/communication on Microsoft's part. https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=1859 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=18...
- vardump 7y ago
  Yeah, that doesn't look good for Microsoft. I thought they've already learned their lesson, but maybe they need to have a periodic embarrassment for that.
tedunangst 7y ago
I believe taviso is familiar with Microsoft applying pressure privately.
- wolf550e 7y ago
  For example: https://twitter.com/taviso/status/1160613095523225600?s=19 https://twitter.com/taviso/status/1160613095523225600?s=19 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20171450 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20171450

zelon88 7y ago

The righteousness of your post reminds me of the climax of a Disney movie. Google does this all the time, on purpose, like clockwork. They aren't the only ones out there looking for zero days in their supply chain, but they're the only ones who ignore a vendors disclosure policy and substitute their own. For example; If Google finds a bug in your product YOU get 90 days before they put you on blast in front of 8 billion people. But if you find a bug in GOOGLE'S product and put them on blast YOU will find yourself in court. Does anyone remember the last time Microsoft or Apple went looking for zero days to drop in public on their blog about Google? They don't. Because they're professional companies with better shit to do than stir the pot. This has NOTHING to do wit supply chain security and EVERYTHING to do with putting heat on their competition. That is why PZ exists. If that weren't true PZ would be looking at non-competing products with large user bases. WordPress comes to mind. But Google doesn't compete with WordPress, so they'll never focus on it.

temac 7y ago
> For example; If Google finds a bug in your product YOU get 90 days before they put you on blast in front of 8 billion people. > But if you find a bug in GOOGLE'S product and put them on blast YOU will find yourself in court. Reference needed.
- zelon88 7y ago
  > For example; If Google finds a bug in your product YOU get 90 days before they put you on blast in front of 8 billion people. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/7xqdxe/google-project-zero-hacker-iphone-bug-bounty https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/7xqdxe/google-project-zer... https://www.csoonline.com/article/2867534/microsoft-blasts-google-for-vulnerability-disclosure-policy.html https://www.csoonline.com/article/2867534/microsoft-blasts-g... Here are Google's many contradictory policies about disclosure. Notice the many discrepancies... https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/p/vulnerability-disclosure-faq.html https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/p/vulnerability-discl... https://security.googleblog.com/2010/07/rebooting-responsible-disclosure-focus.html https://security.googleblog.com/2010/07/rebooting-responsibl... https://sites.google.com/site/bughunteruniversity/nonvuln https://sites.google.com/site/bughunteruniversity/nonvuln https://www.google.com/about/appsecurity/reward-program/ https://www.google.com/about/appsecurity/reward-program/ https://www.google.com/about/appsecurity/ https://www.google.com/about/appsecurity/ https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/p/vulnerability-disclosure-faq.html https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/p/vulnerability-discl... > But if you find a bug in GOOGLE'S product and put them on blast YOU will find yourself in court. Maybe a bit of a dramatization, but the point remains. If Google finds a bug in your product: Your policy is moot. They follow their policy. If you find a bug in their product you are expected to follow their policy. In the case of Apple their "security professionals" will make jokes about you on Twitter and in the case of Microsoft they just do whatever the fuck they want. "Your patches come out on Tuesday, huh? Well that's 92 days, big-guy! Tough break..."