> Sure. The moment the discussion strays toward these topics, I am > obviously not at liberty to discuss them freely.
Totally understandable; I need to figure out the 'rhetorical question' emoticon and I probably should've put a disclaimer of some sort up there somewhere. I know how sensitive this sector can be. > In general, I simply think that framing the problems that the industry > is facing in terms of dealing with a new, sophisticated adversary is > kind of meaningless and destructive, even if the risk is fundamentally > true. The idea that AV + IDS + a prepackaged PCI / SOX / BS7799 audit > was a legitimate response to the threats faced 5-10 years ago is about > as misguided as the notion that $2M botnet monitoring or an IV drip of > 0-day vulns will do the trick this time around. > > (Even if you need offensive capabilities - and most parties don't - > nurturing a free market of 0-days sold to the highest bidder for > exorbitant fees does not seem like a particularly good long-term > plan.) I generally agree, other than I think it's important to understand that regardless of our sentiments, 'they' believe in it and are investing in it and that sorta makes it reality. The more people call things a myth or unimportant or hype or what not, the more it operates in the dark. We're not talking about germans who think they live in a crashed UFO and are out to lift your 0-day, we're talking about the governments of the world realizing they have a new black-ops tool. That sorta makes it fundamentally different, or at least it does to me. either way, we're mostly on the same page; didn't mean to drag it out. cheers. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
