Mario has years of experience (more than 10 in fact) in exploit writing
and vulnerability assessment. I would consider his position on the subject.
If you don't believe me, Argentina extended me certifications that
proves that I can tell who has vulnerability assesment skills and who
does not.
If you don't believe in Argentina, you should know the ONU accepts it as
a sovereign independent country.
That is the complete certificate chain proving you that Mario is not an
idiot as you inferred.
Best regards,
Alfred
On 03/14/2014 10:50 AM, Sergio 'shadown' Alvarez wrote:
Dear Nicholas Lemonias,
I don't use to get in these scrapy discussions, but yeah you are in a
completetly different level if you compare yourself with Mario.
You are definitely a Web app/metasploit-user guy and pick up a discussion
with a binary and memory corruption ninja exploit writter like Mario. You
should know your place and shut up. Period.
Btw, if you dare discussing with a beast like lcamtuf, you are definitely out
of your mind.
Cheers,
Sergio.
-- Sergio
On Mar 14, 2014, Nicholas Lemonias. lem.niko...@googlemail.com wrote:
We are on a different level perhaps. We do certainly disagree on those
points.
I wouldn't hire you as a consultant, if you can't tell if that is a
valid
vulnerability..
Best Regards,
Nicholas Lemonias.
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Mario Vilas mvi...@gmail.com wrote:
But do you have all the required EH certifications? Try this one from
the
Institute for
Certified Application Security Specialists: http://www.asscert.com/
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Nicholas Lemonias.
lem.niko...@googlemail.com wrote:
Thanks Michal,
We are just trying to improve Google's security and contribute to
the
research community after all. If you are still on EFNet give me a
shout
some time.
We have done so and consulted to hundreds of clients including
Microsoft, Nokia, Adobe and some of the world's biggest
corporations. We
are also strict supporters of the ACM code of conduct.
Regards,
Nicholas Lemonias.
AISec
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 6:29 AM, Nicholas Lemonias.
lem.niko...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi Jerome,
Thank you for agreeing on access control, and separation of duties.
However successful exploitation permits arbitrary write() of any
file of
choice.
I could release an exploit code in C Sharp or Python that permits
multiple file uploads of any file/types, if the Google security
team feels
that this would be necessary. This is unpaid work, so we are not so
keen on
that job.
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 6:04 AM, Jerome Athias
athiasjer...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi
I concur that we are mainly discussing a terminology problem.
In the context of a Penetration Test or WAPT, this is a Finding.
Reporting this finding makes sense in this context.
As a professional, you would have to explain if/how this finding
is a
Weakness*, a Violation (/Regulations, Compliance, Policies or
Requirements[1])
* I would say Weakness + Exposure = Vulnerability. Vulnerability +
Exploitability (PoC) = Confirmed Vulnerability that needs Business
Impact and Risk Analysis
So I would probably have reported this Finding as a Weakness (and
not
Vulnerability. See: OWASP, WASC-TC, CWE), explaining that it is
not
Best Practice (your OWASP link and Cheat Sheets), and even if
mitigative/compensative security controls (Ref Orange Book),
security
controls like white listing (or at least black listing. see also
ESAPI) should be 1) part of the [1]security requirements of a
proper
SDLC (Build security in) as per Defense-in-Depth security
principles
and 2) used and implemented correctly.
NB: A simple Threat Model (i.e. list of CAPEC) would be a solid
support to your report
This would help to evaluate/measure the risk (e.g. CVSS).
Helping the decision/actions around this risk
PS: interestingly, in this case, I'm not sure that the Separation
of
Duties security principle was applied correctly by Google in term
of
Risk Acceptance (which could be another Finding)
So in few words, be careful with the terminology. (don't always
say
vulnerability like the media say hacker, see RFC1392) Use a CWE ID
(e.g. CWE-434, CWE-183, CWE-184 vs. CWE-616)
My 2 bitcents
Sorry if it is not edible :)
Happy Hacking!
/JA
https://github.com/athiasjerome/XORCISM
2014-03-14 7:19 GMT+03:00 Michal Zalewski lcam...@coredump.cx:
Nicholas,
I remember my early years in the infosec community - and sadly,
so do
some of the more seasoned readers of this list :-) Back then, I
thought that the only thing that mattered is the ability to find
bugs.
But after some 18 years in the industry, I now know that there's
an
even more important and elusive skill.
That skill boils down to having a robust mental model of what
constitutes a security flaw - and being able to explain your
thinking
to others in a precise and internally consistent manner that
convinces
others to act.
