On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 8:03 AM, Tom O <[email protected]> wrote:
> Posting a news article without context or response from Veracode is weak.

That was just a reminder for a topic that has already been discussed
on this list. My main intention was to provide an example (in the form
of a post similar to yours) for Jonathan Wilkes' remark wrt. affected
reputation.

> Chris Wysopal stated the static crypto checks were run to check if the API's
> were implemented correctly, not implementation of custom keygen.

I am sure there are after-the-fact excuses. Since you didn't provide a
reference, I assume that this specific excuse if not something worthy
of attention. Veracode's report is here, if you are interested:
https://blog.crypto.cat/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Cryptocat_Attestation_Veracode_20130222_final.pdf

Looking at the code is indeed not mentioned in the report, so it's all
fine, I guess — just make sure something like that is in the next
contract.

-- 
Maxim Kammerer
Liberté Linux: http://dee.su/liberte
-- 
Liberationtech is a public list whose archives are searchable on Google. 
Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
[email protected].

Reply via email to