5 ms·

Is it just me, or does anyone wish that compromise disclosures should be hosted somewhere other than the site that has been compromised? What if there's a persi

Is it just me, or does anyone wish that compromise disclosures should be hosted somewhere other than the site that has been compromised? What if there's a persistent threat and their webserver is still hosed, injecting 0days into responses? Not that it's happening here - I still clicked it - but I was hesitant.

xico 12y ago
You are right. We should even go further and reset the whole interweb each time there is a disclosure, or at least randomize the DNS records of the affected servers.
protomyth 12y ago
It is the one site you know the users will come to. I would do the new web server at old address. Hacked machines should not be put back in service.
- couchwire 12y ago
  I think what you want is the "Full Disclosure" mailing list: http://nmap.org/mailman/listinfo/fulldisclosure
  - protomyth 12y ago
    I'm pretty sure the affected people will visit the original site, and I'm not sure they will visit the site you mention.
ploxiln 12y ago
I don't think there's much point in worrying about drive-by browser attacks. We all visit a lot of sites, and many sites are hacked without their owners knowing, but just serving malware/phishing/redirects for spam, ad networks, and injection into more popular sites. If a browser 0day really did apply to my up-to-date version of firefox and really was a problem, well, I'd feel pretty screwed.
jldugger 12y ago
If they have any clue, they rebuilt their entire server and deprecated the old one.
nicofuma 12y ago
This page is hosted on a new VM (set up on this purpose) which only serve static html files, so...