> "Unfortunately, if these exploits are being bought by governments for > offensive purposes, then there is pressure to selectively harden > sensitive targets while keeping the attack secret from everyone else, > leaving technology—and its users—vulnerable to attack."
> So, taking these two together, what the EFF seems to advocate is that > vulnerabilities and such purchased with the intent to be used for > offensive operations should also be used in some way for defensive > operations. Subject to OPSEC concerns, I think this is more or less > correct: if we know of a bug, we know it has a limited shelf life > (especially once it's used). It makes sense to then transition to > fixing the same problem in our systems. I get it now! If we just patch *all* the bugs, then there will be no bugs left for anyone else to exploit. Guys, this is brilliant. How did we get scooped by a few lawyers at the EFF when we've been working on this for years? -LT _______________________________________________ Dailydave mailing list [email protected] https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
