RE: [Full-Disclosure] Administrivia: Binary Executables w/o Source

[Simon Thornton <simon.thornton@swift.com>]

Hi Len,

LR> don't send binary executables on the list
LR> unless you include the source code. We should add
LR> this to the charter shortly.

I can understand your reasoning but I think this is a little extreme,
the value of this list is the (relatively) unrestricted flow of info.

Sometimes the binaries maybe of interest, as long as they are not very
large. A classic example would be output from tcpdump for a new trojan,
very useful when writing SNORT sigs. 

What would be useful is if people put binaries in password protected
ZIP/RAR etc and put the password in the message, this would stop AV s/w
(or similar) removing the attachments as "infected". It also means that
the reader has to consciously open the attachment.

As with any binary you take a risk; caveat emptor, it is how you
assess/mitigate/deal with the risk which determines whether you will
open unidentified executables. Sometimes the risk is worth it.

If you really must put a limit, prevent attachments greater in size than
say 200K, anything else should use a link to a website/ftp server for
distribution.

Just my two euro cents worth ..... :-)


Rgds,

Simon

smime.p7s