Re: [Full-Disclosure] Re: Addressing Cisco Security Issues

[Luke Norman <luke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Whilst I can see your point, when you have an exploit for which there is
a widely-published vulnerability publicly available, would it not be
easier to simply offer the software to those who want it. I know that if
the next time an apache vuln came out, I had to contact someone at
apache to get them to give me the update so that I could stop my server
being vulnerable, I wouldn't be very happy. If there are publicly
available exploits, there should be publicly available patches.
Luke

Clayton Kossmeyer wrote:

> The TAC process for this is to direct customers to their ISP for
> downloads.  The reasons for this are many, but one of the major ones
> is that SPs/ISPs want to control what versions of software are
> deployed within their networks.
>
>  


_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html