Tue Apr 8 13:39:40 EDT 2014 steve harley
> on 2014-04-08 8:51 Igor Roshchin wrote > > Strictly speaking it is not a "zero-day", as it was introduced in the > > version 1.0.1, and the earlier versions are not vulnerable. > > it does seem to be a zero-day threat; zero-day refers to the timing of > the > announcement rather than to what versions of software are vulnerable Upon careful consideration of the multiple definitions of what "zero-day" means, I think you are correct. I had a wrong definition of the term in my mind. (I always assumed "zero day vulnerability" [not zero-day attack] is something that existed in the software undiscovered for long time, essentially since the early stages of the software) I stand corrected. Thank you, Steve. My apology, Tim! Igor -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
