>From today's AP story: FBI Skeptical on Internet Attack Source http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=528&e=3&cid=528&u=/ap/2 0030129/ap_on_hi_te/internet_attack
Litchfield, who works for NGS Software Inc., said Wednesday that he now appreciates the dangers in publicly disclosing such computer code. He said he originally published those blueprints for computer administrators to understand how hackers might use the program to attack their systems. "One has to question whether the benefits are outweighed by the disadvantages," Litchfield said in a telephone interview from his home in London. "I'm certainly going to be more careful about the way in which anything is disclosed." Richard -----Original Message----- From: Georgi Guninski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 12:18 PM To: Richard M. Smith; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] David Litchfield talks about the SQL Worm in the Washington Post So what? This sql hype highly resembles the code red stuff. Then people accused eeye for releasing the bug, though they didn't provide exploit code. IIRC Litchfield also didn't provide exploit code. Should advisories be "There is a bug. Go patch. End."? Is there any real evidence that releasing PoC helps high scale incidents like this one? - Don't think so. Sure writing worms and virii is bad, but this sql worm has a positive side effect imho. The real damage done was very limitied (high traffic in m$ network according to the reg, some atms stopped working for strange reason, korean spammers off the net) compared to the potential long lasting damage from stealing info from these DBs. There wasn't such fuzz about the apache worm, though imho apache has much more market share than m$ sql. Georgi Guninski http://www.guninski.com Richard M. Smith wrote: > Hi, > > The following quote from David Litchfield appeared in a front-page > article in today's Washington Post: > > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57550-2003Jan28.html > > "You have this ideal vision of doing something > for the greater good," said David Litchfield, > managing director of Next Generation Security > Software Ltd. of London, who acknowledged that > a small bit of his code might have been used in > the attack. "I will probably no longer publish such code." > > Perhaps David can put together a longer message for Bugtraq and > Full-Disclosure on his changing views of publishing proof-of-concept > code for security vulnerabilities. > > Richard M. Smith > http://www.ComputerBytesMan.com > > _______________________________________________ > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html > > _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
