Search: Home Bugtraq Vulnerabilities Mailing Lists Jobs Tools Vista
Zero-day holiday
Kelly Martin, 2006-01-04

A few hundred million Windows XP machines lay vulnerable on the Web today, a week after a zero-day exploit was discovered. Meanwhile, new approaches and ideas from the academic world - that focus exclusively on children - may give us hope for the future after all.

Comments Mode:
Zero-day holiday 2006-01-04
Anonymous (2 replies)
Re: Zero-day holiday 2006-01-05
Kelly Martin (4 replies)
Re: Re: Zero-day holiday 2006-01-05
Jack
Re: Re: Zero-day holiday 2006-01-05
assurbanipal
Immoral, etc. 2006-01-05
Andrew Jones
Re: Re: Zero-day holiday 2006-01-06
Anonymous
Re: Zero-day holiday 2006-01-05
Anonymous
Zero-day holiday 2006-01-04
Nick
Zero-day holiday 2006-01-04
Anonymous
Zero-day holiday 2006-01-05
Matthew Murphy (1 replies)
This week, I've read a lot of out-of-control FUD on the web about this WMF vulnerability. This is, hands down, the worst piece of tech journalism I have ever seen.

Contrary to popular opinion, millions aren't compromised, because a good majority of non-critical assets had nobody sitting at them over the holiday season. Further, how many people are going to run and click now with as much media reporting as has been done on the issue.

Aside from a shameless plug for BugTraq disguised in a call-to-action to readers, I see nothing of any substance or accuracy in your discussion of the WMF zero-day. I, for one, would prefer *NOT* to see your readers solely use a heavily-moderated list like BugTraq to communicate viable workarounds. I'd prefer they go to unmoderated lists, where the information is distributed immediately, rather than to a list like BugTraq where the keys are held by a corporation that advocates this kind of fear-mongering.

Next time, Kelly, you might want to stick to the script.

I don't normally assail paranoia in this fashion, even if it is delusional... but *MILLIONS*?

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/377/32883#32883
incorrect 2006-01-05
Kelly Martin (2 replies)
Re: incorrect 2006-01-05
Not the original poster
Re: incorrect 2006-01-07
Matthew Murphy (1 replies)
thanks 2006-01-12
Kelly Martin
Zero-day holiday 2006-01-05
Anonymous
Zero-day holiday 2006-01-05
hhhobbit
Zero-day holiday 2006-01-05
horror_vacui
Zero-day holiday 2006-01-05
Anonymous
Zero-day holiday 2006-01-05
M. Amos
Zero-day holiday 2006-01-05
Anonymous
Zero-day holiday 2006-01-05
Anonymous
Not a real solution 2006-01-05
Mike Warot (1 replies)
Re: Not a real solution 2006-01-06
Khem C (1 replies)
Re: Re: Not a real solution 2006-01-07
Anonymous
Zero-day holiday 2006-01-12
Nicolas Falliere







 

Privacy Statement
Copyright 2008, SecurityFocus