2 ms·
Those aren't even close to the same thing though. One is illegal and the other, selling to a company like Zerodium, isn't. The ethical objection I have is tha
by ryan29 6y ago
Those aren't even close to the same thing though. One is illegal and the other, selling to a company like Zerodium, isn't. The ethical objection I have is that you lose control over how that exploit is used if you sell it to someone like Zerodium and I think it's better for users and the general public if bugs are disclosed directly to software makers.
However, the idea that security researchers are guilted into "being ethical" while the (rich) executives for massive, multi-billion dollar tech companies are saving money on security, plus skimping on paying security researchers fair value when bugs are discovered, frustrates me.
It's hypocritical for big tech to expect "ethical" behavior from security researchers when it's a lot closer to "let us take advantage of you" IMO. If it becomes a debate about ethics, I think every time an exploit is sold to a company like Zerodium it's primarily the fault of the tech companies that are exploiting security researchers.
- krageon 6y agoWhile I certainly understand the viewpoint of being bribable by a million dollars, legality has absolutely nothing to do with ethics. As you say, clamoring for ethical behaviour at all in this context is terrible and completely missing the point.