4 ms·
A couple of ways that vulnerability research is nothing like bioweapon engineering: 1. Vulnerabilities exist in software, whether a researcher uncovers them or
by p0x33 12y ago
A couple of ways that vulnerability research is nothing like bioweapon engineering:
1. Vulnerabilities exist in software, whether a researcher uncovers them or not. America's adversaries will continue to identify and exploit these vulnerabilities. So legislation that keeps this information out of the hands of our defense/intelligence community would really only serve to weaken us relative to our enemies, rather than making us safer.
2. Die Hard movies aside, software vulnerabilities are far less likely to lead to apocalyptic outcomes than nuclear or biological weapons. Maybe a better analogy would be the open market manufacturing of surveillance technologies, like cameras and radios. Where's the outrage about telephoto lenses that camera companies make that can be used to monitor our enemies or to take pictures of your daughter in your backyard swimming pool from a half-mile away?
- Zigurd 12y ago> America's adversaries will continue to identify and exploit these vulnerabilities. So legislation that keeps this information out of the hands of our defense/intelligence community would really only serve to weaken us relative to our enemies, rather than making us safer. Encouraging freelancers to find vulns and sell them to the highest bidder also makes us less safe. It also encourages vulns to be created in projects for the purpose of later selling them. Secondly, the American point of view on this is colored by the fact the US has never been the target of a cyberweapon of the power of stuxnet, designed to cripple a large and critical military or industrial system.