I am just saying that developers and designers make mistakes and that there is no getting around that. Rather than relying on the benevolent 0day researchers from the sky publicly disclosing their vulnerabilities, more responsible QA testing within the company will prevent many of these vulnerabilities from occurring in the first place. Or do you have a better idea?
On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 11:06:33PM +0100, Benji wrote: > Let me expand on that, otherwise I'm sure it's unclear. > Is your suggestion, to remove the worry of developers making mistakes, to > add another human process after it and rely on this to remove all > mistakes? > > On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 10:54 PM, Benji <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yes, after the people that can make mistakes, we should have people that > are incapable of making mistakes. I totally agree, what a good idea. > > On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Bryan <[email protected]> wrote: > > The code monkeys can make mistakes as long as there is a process to > detect and remedy their mistakes before things get shipped. Hiring > decent application security researchers to audit their code would be a > good start. > On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 09:51:40AM -0400, Lee wrote: > > On 4/20/13, Sergio Alvarez <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Why instead of discussing about ethics about 0days, don't you > discuss about > > > responsible DEVELOPMENT instead? > > > If products where properly designed and developed there wouldn't > be 0days > > > for them, would them? > > > > Only if the designers & developers were perfect and never made > mistakes. > > _______________________________________________ > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
