3 ms·

I love and hate sandboxes. They're great second line of defence, but large organisations tend to reject fixing RCE when you are not able to escape sandbox and

• Analemma_ 2y ago
  > but large organisations tend to reject fixing RCE when you are not able to escape sandbox and so anything meaningful Wait, who does this? AFAIK Apple, Microsoft and Google all have bug bounties which obviously offer bigger rewards for sandbox escape, but still pay something if you find a vulnerability which is blocked by the sandbox. They're all well aware that bad guys collect and store non-functional RCEs in the hopes of using them when a sandbox escape is found.
  • aidenn0 2y ago
    Depending on where it is in the product lifecycle, I've seen this extreme pushback against fixing symptomless bugs. I was working on a project where someone thought to turn on tools for catching malloc errors (use past the end of allocated buffer, use after free &c.). The team that did this found bugs in their own code, of course, but also many from other teams. I was there in the room as people went item-by-item litigating whether or not each bug should be fixed. Things like "sure this is use-after-free, but it's used immediately after the free and because of the struct offset, it can't corrupt the heap linked-list, so we won't fix it"